Tannin formulations for agricultural use in plants

ABSTRACT

The preparation, composition, and method of use of an antibacterial formulation utilizing tannins, acceptable for agriculture and for use against bacterial and fungicidal diseases in plants. The composition is based on an organic matrix and may be balanced with dispersants, flocculants and humectants, and may be used against a wide range of agricultural bacterial diseases.

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No.16/894,292 filed Jun. 5, 2020, which is a divisional of U.S. patentapplication Ser. No. 16/198,950 filed Nov. 23, 2018 and issued as U.S.Pat. No. 10,757,942 on Sep. 1, 2020, which claims benefit to U.S.provisional application No. 62/722,782, filed Aug. 24, 2018; U.S.provisional application No. 62/723,168, filed Aug. 27, 2018; and U.S.provisional application No. 62/727,237, filed Sep. 5, 2018; the entirecontents of each of which are hereby incorporated by reference in itsentirety.

BACKGROUND

Bacteria are the most abundant microorganisms on our planet, and theprevention and control of bacteria and the diseases that they cause,particularly in the agricultural field, is of utmost importance as itdirectly impacts the food production needed for human sustenance. Someexamples of this are mentioned below.

Erwinia amylovora has caused incalculable losses by destroying completeplantations of apples and pears in the countries in which these fruitstrees are cultivated. For example, in the state of Chihuahua, Mexicoalone, more than 50 thousand pear trees have died and more than amillion trees of different apple varieties have been infected. This hascaused both large and the abandonment of the cultivation of such fruitsin producing regions of that state. Thus this has evolved from aphytosanitary problem for fruit producers into a serious social problem.Fruit growers are seriously worried about the symptoms of the disease,in that the infected trees seem as if they have been burned with aflamethrower, hence the name “fire blight.” This same situation hasoccurred in highly industrialized countries where these fruits arecultivated, such as, for example, the United States of America, England,France, and the countries of the former Soviet Union. After blossomseason, bacteria splashed by moisture events such as drizzle, dew andwind can infect succulent shoots. Blight shoot or shoot blight appearsone to several weeks after falling petals. Symptoms of the diseasecontinue to progress through the spring and summer season in susceptibletissues, such as leaves and twigs.

Pierce's disease, caused by the bacteria Xylella fastidiosa, hasstrategic importance due to the amount of money that it cost when itattacks crops such as vine, olive, citrus, stone fruit trees, such asplum and peach, as well as almond trees. This causes a devastatingeffect as a result of the large surfaces it affects. It is also one ofthe most studied bacteria by scientists because of the bacteria'scolonizing habit, in that it can survive in different varietal cuts thathave been transported without strict sanitary control at borders. Thedisease has spread, and has been reported already in a good number ofcountries in Latin America, Europe, and Asia. This disease is consideredto be a main factor limiting the expansion and success of affectedcultivars.

In Central America and South America, thousands of African palm treesare dying because of an illness caused by a bacterium which has not beenidentified correctly. This has caused a need for alternatives for itscontrol and for a product that can counteract the devastating effects ofthe plague. To do so, it is necessary to establish research protocolswith the appropriate scientific rigor and for those protocols to becarried out with a large team of producers, and potentially governments,in order to establish the biological cycle of the pathogen and how totreat or prevent it.

In banana producing countries threatened by a terrible disease called“moko,” caused by a bacterium named Ralstonia solanacearum, there hasbeen the loss and abandonment of complete crops, which are impossible toreplant because the pathogen survives in the soil for years on thetissues of a sick plant. Farmers have to spend large sums of money tosterilize the soil by applying toxic materials, which causes negativeeffects on the beneficial flora and fauna in the area, thus altering thebalance and delicate nutritional biogeochemical cycles present in thatecosystem.

Having the same importance are the bacteria that attack vegetables,grasses, members of the cruciferous family, members of the solanaceaefamily, members of the rosaceous family, members of the ericaceousfamily, and the like when in favorable climatic conditions for thedevelopment of the disease you can almost completely lose the crop andto avoid it, farmers will have to invest large sums of money in applyingmaterials based on antibiotics depending on their legislation and theiravailability.

The use of antibiotics in agriculture, such as gentamicin,oxytetracycline, streptomycin, and kasugamycin, offer viablealternatives for the prevention and control of these exemplarypathogens, but the use of these antibiotics has been limited duringrecent years in Europe, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and Brazil.Because of this, producers have very limited options to treat or preventthe bacterial diseases which, year-by-year, reduce their crops and causelarge losses of their crops. Producers can only use formulations basedon copper for foliar applications, which offers a limited control of thesanitary emergency they have. In these countries, where the use ofantibiotics is forbidden for agricultural use, the incidence ofbacterial diseases is increasing in a worrying way, and in some places,such as Italy, Spain, New Zealand, France, and others countries, theproduction of both vine and kiwi are going through a delicate stage dueto the presence of diseases caused by bacteria that have devastatedcomplete cultivars. In Australia, there exists a serious worry by thegovernment and producers of a bacterial disease that has been presentingin wheat, blueberries, sugarcane, and cereals, thereby putting in checkthe production of these foods. The same happens in Brazil, the UnitedStates, and England, where producers of citrus crops are reportingincalculable losses resulting from a disease called the “Yellow Dragon,”which is caused by the bacterium Candidatus liberibacter also affectingChina, Taiwan, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, Myanmar, the Philippines,Pakistan, Thailand, Nepal, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and others.

SUMMARY

The main purpose of this disclosure is to provide a new antibacterialformulation acceptable for agricultural use. The formulation iseffective to prevent, treat, and control diseases caused by bacteria andfungus in plants, while also providing for an environmentally-friendlycomposition, thereby permitting its authorized use in those countriesthat have high registry standards and those countries in which the useof antibiotics have been controlled or forbidden.

The formulation comprises tannins as active ingredient mixed withagriculturally acceptable excipients, for example, a lignin such assodium lignosulfonate, a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon such asnaphthalene sulfonate, polysaccharides such as starch, and siliceoussedimentary rock such as diatomaceous earth. The agriculturallyacceptable formulation can be deposited in and mixed with a reasonableamount of water to be sprinkled in very thin droplets of water “to thepoint of dripping” via appropriate equipment to the crop that it isintended to protect, in which bacterial damage may be present and wouldotherwise continue to harm the plants. The agriculturally acceptableformulation thereby avoids exceeding the profitable economic thresholdsfor the food producer.

The present disclosure relates, in part, to a composition comprisingtannins, a method of using the composition comprising tannins, and theuse of the composition comprising tannins. The disclosure below providesadditional detail regarding the contents of the composition and how itmay be used and applied to plants.

Tannins have been used since ancient times in the tannery industry.Egyptians used the fruits of acacias for tannery purposes, and tanninsare also used in wine making and medicine to naturally treat somediseases in humans. Tannins are very astringent polyphenolic compoundsand have a bitter taste.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIGS. 1(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 2(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 3(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 4(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 5(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 6(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 7(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 8(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 9(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Clavibacter sp.

FIGS. 10(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Erwinia sp.

FIGS. 11(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Erwinia sp.

FIGS. 12(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Erwinia sp.

FIGS. 13(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Erwinia sp.

FIGS. 14(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Erwinia sp.

FIGS. 15(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Erwinia sp.

FIGS. 16(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

FIGS. 17(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

FIGS. 18(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

FIGS. 19(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

FIGS. 20(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

FIGS. 21(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Pseudomonas sp.

FIGS. 22(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 23(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 24(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 25(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 26(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 27(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 28(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 5% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 29(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 10% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 30(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Ralstonia sp.

FIGS. 31(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Xanthomonas sp.

FIGS. 32(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Xanthomonas sp.

FIGS. 33(a)-(c) show the results when a mixture containing 20% of apremixture of tannins was tested against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 34 shows the results of a test using composition A5.

FIG. 35 shows the results of a test using composition B15.

FIG. 36 shows the results of a test using composition +20.

FIG. 37 shows the results of a test using Composition A.

FIG. 38 shows the results of a test using composition A5.

FIG. 39 shows the results of a test using composition B15.

FIG. 40 shows the results of a test using composition +20.

FIG. 41 shows the results of a test using Composition A.

FIG. 42 shows the results of a test using composition A5.

FIG. 43 shows the results of a test using composition B15.

FIGS. 44(a) and (b) show the results of a test using composition +20.

FIGS. 45(a) and (b) show the results of a test using Composition A.

FIG. 46 shows the results of a test using composition A5.

FIG. 47 shows the results of a test using composition B15.

FIGS. 48(a)-(c) show the results of a test using composition +20.

FIG. 49 shows the results of the test using Composition A.

FIGS. 50(a) and (b) show examples of blossom blight that were measuredduring a test.

FIG. 51 is a graphical representation of tabular data.

FIG. 52 is a graphical representation of tabular data.

FIG. 53 is a graphical representation of tabular data.

FIGS. 54(a) and (b) are linear prediction maps (Kriging).

FIGS. 55(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Alternaria sp.

FIGS. 56(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Phytophthora sp.

FIGS. 57(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Colletotrichumsp.

FIGS. 58(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Fusarium sp.

FIGS. 59(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Fusarium sp.

FIGS. 60(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Fusarium sp.

FIGS. 61(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Aspergillus sp.

FIGS. 62(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Aspergillus sp.

FIGS. 63(a) and (b) show the results of a test against Aspergillus sp.

FIG. 64 shows the results of a test against Clavibacter sp.

FIG. 65 shows the results of a test against Clavibacier sp.

FIG. 66 shows the results of a test against Claxibacter sp.

FIG. 67 shows the results of a test against Clavibacter sp.

FIG. 68 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

FIG. 69 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

FIG. 70 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

FIG. 71 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

FIG. 72 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

FIG. 73 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

FIG. 74 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

FIG. 75 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

FIG. 76 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 77 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 78 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 79 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 80 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 81 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 82 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 83 shows the results of a test against Xanthomonas sp.

FIG. 84 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

FIG. 85 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

FIG. 86 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

FIG. 87 shows the results of a test against Erwinia sp.

FIG. 88 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

FIG. 89 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

FIG. 90 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

FIG. 91 shows the results of a test against Ralstonia sp.

FIG. 92 shows the results of a test against Clavibacter sp.

FIG. 93 shows the results of a test against Clavibacter sp.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The agriculturally acceptable formulation of the present disclosure mayinclude tannins as active ingredient mixed with agriculturallyacceptable excipients. Such agriculturally acceptable excipientsinclude, for example, bactericides, resistance inductors, biopesticides,fungicides, foliage fertilizers, hormones, and the like.

Tannins that may be used in the agriculturally acceptable formulationinclude any type of tannin, such as but not limited to ellagic,pyrogallol, or gallic tannins. Also “pseudo-tannins” can be used such asgallic acid, such atrihydroxybenzoic acid, or ellagic acid. Castalaginand vescalagin (both are ellagic tannins) are examples of such tannins,but the tannins are not limited thereto, and other tannins may also beused. For example, flavan-3-ols, such as catechin, epicatechin gallate,epigallocatechin, epigallocatechin gallate, proanthocyanidins,theaflavins, and thearubigins may be used. Chlorogenic acids (CGA), suchas hydroxycinnamic acids, caffeic acid, ferulic acid, and p-coumaricacid, and quinic acid may also be used. In addition, ipecacuanhic acids,such as metine, cephaeline, emetamine, ipecacuanhic acid, psychotrine,and O-methylpsychotrine can also be used. Tannins such as roburine,castaline, castanopsinines, casuarictine, excoecarianine,excoecarinines, grandinine, pterocarinine, punicacorteine, punicalagine,rhoipteleanines, roburines, vescaline, gallic acid, ellagic acid,procianidine may also be used. Importantly, the above tannins areexemplary only, and any other tannin may be used. The tannins may beused alone or in combination with one another. Natural or synthetictannins may be used. In exemplary embodiments, the tannin may be one ormore of a flavonoid, procyanidin, proanthocyanin, prodelfinidin,profisetidine, proanthocyanidin, cyanidin, anthocyanin, and catechin.Formulations of the present disclosure may also comprise, in someinstances, flavanones and/or flavanols, for example.

The amount of tannins that may be present in the agriculturallyacceptable formulation is not particularly limited, but may be an amountof from 0.01% by mass to 99% by mass. For example, they may be presentin the formulation in an amount of from 0.1% by mass to 50% by mass. Asanother example, they may be present in the formulation in an amount offrom 0.1% by mass to 10% by mass. As another example, they may bepresent in the formulation in an amount of from 0.1% by mass to 1% bymass, from 0.5% by mass to 5% by mass, from 1% by mass to 10% by mass,from 10% to 20% by mass, from 20% to 30% by mass, from 30% to 40% bymass, from 40% to 50% by mass, from 50% to 60% by mass, from 60% to 70%by mass, from 70% to 80% by mass, and from 80% to 90% by mass. Asanother example, they may be present in the formulation in an amount offrom 1% by mass to 25% by mass, from 10% by mass to 50% by mass, from25% by mass to 75% by mass, or from 50% by mass to 99% by mass. However,the amount of tannin is not particularly limited so long as the amountprovides for the antibacterial or antifungal effects disclosed herein.The tannins may be used and applied to plants in amounts greater than orless than any amount that may be otherwise present in a plant that hasnot been treated with the presently disclosed composition. If thetannins are applied to a plant that produces tannins, the tanninsapplied to a given plant may be different from any tannin produced bythat plant, or alternatively may be the same type of tannin produced bythat plant.

The tannin-based preparation may include one or more otheragriculturally acceptable items, such as dispersants, surfactants and/orhumectants, inert components, thickeners, bactericides, resistanceinductors, biopesticides, fungicides, foliage fertilizers, hormones, andthe like.

Examples of the dispersants that may be used with the agriculturallyacceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, sodiumlignosulfonate, alpha-olefin sulfonates, alky lauryl sulfonates, ligninsulfonates, block copolymers, ethylene oxide/propylene oxide copolymers,polyoxyethylene-polyoxypropylene copolymers, tridecyl alcoholethoxylates, and polyacrylates. Mixtures of dispersants may also beused. The amount of dispersant present is not particularly limited. Insome exemplary embodiments, the amount of a dispersant in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of dispersants in theformulation, may be between 1% and 70%. In yet further exemplaryembodiments, the amount of a dispersant in the formulation, or the totalamount of a mixture of dispersants in the formulation, may be greaterthan, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%,55%, 60%, or 65%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of adispersant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture ofdispersants in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 2%, 5%,10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, or 65%. In someexemplary embodiments, the amount of a dispersant in the formulation, orthe total amount of a mixture of dispersants in the formulation, may bebetween 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55% or 55% and70%.

Examples of the surfactants and/or humectants that may be used with theagriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to,naphthalene sulfonate, dioctyl sodium sulfosuccinate, glycerin,polyglycerin, castor oil and/or soybean oil, dodecylbenzene sodiumsulfonate, sodium lauryl sulfate, and other phosphates. Mixtures ofsurfactants and/or humectants may also be used. The amount ofsurfactants and/or humectants present is not particularly limited. Insome exemplary embodiments, the amount of a surfactant and/or humectantin the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of surfactantsand/or humectants in the formulation, may be between 1% and 70%. In yetfurther exemplary embodiments, the amount of a surfactant and/orhumectant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture ofsurfactants and/or humectants in the formulation, may be greater than,for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%,60%, or 65%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of a surfactantand/or humectant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture ofsurfactants and/or humectants in the formulation, may be less than, forexample, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%,or 65%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a surfactant and/orhumectant in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture ofsurfactants and/or humectants in the formulation, may be between 5% and20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55% or 55% and 70%.

Examples of the inert components that may be used with theagriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to,celite, diatomaceous earth, bentonite, pyrophyllite, kaolin,montmorillonite, thenardite, attapulgite, dolomite, clay, cork, humicacids, and fulvic acids. Mixtures of inert components may also be used.The amount of inert components present is not particularly limited. Insome exemplary embodiments, the amount of an inert component in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of inert components in theformulation, may be between 1% and 95%. In yet further exemplaryembodiments, the amount of an inert component in the formulation, or thetotal amount of a mixture of inert components in the formulation, may begreater than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%,45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85% or 90%. In other exemplaryembodiments, the amount of an inert component in the formulation, or thetotal amount of a mixture of inert components in the formulation, may beless than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%,50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, 70%, 75%, 80%, 85% or 90%. In some exemplaryembodiments, the amount of an inert component in the formulation, or thetotal amount of a mixture of inert components in the formulation, may bebetween 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55%, 55% and 70%,70% and 85%, or 80% and 95%.

Examples of the thickeners that may be used with the agriculturallyacceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, xanthan gum,guar gum, maltodextrins, dextrins, lecithin, and polysaccharides.Mixtures of thickeners may also be used. The amount of thickenerspresent is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, theamount of a thickener in the formulation, or the total amount of amixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be between 1% and 70%. Inyet further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of thickeners in theformulation, may be greater than, for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%,25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, or 65%. In other exemplaryembodiments, the amount of a thickener in the formulation, or the totalamount of a mixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be less than,for example, 2%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%,60%, or 65%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener inthe formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of thickeners in theformulation, may be between 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40%and 55% or 55% and 70%.

Examples of the bactericides that may be used with the agriculturallyacceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, gentamicin,streptomycin, oxytetracycline, kasugamicin, kanamycin, TCMTB((benzothiazol-2-ylthio)methyl thiocyanate), MTC (methylenebis(thiocyanate)), blasticidin, natamicyn, and mixtures thereof.Additional examples of bactericides that may be used include otheraminoglycocides and other tetracyclines. The amount of bactericidespresent is not particularly limited. In some exemplary embodiments, theamount of a bactericide in the formulation, or the total amount of amixture of bactericides in the formulation, may be between 5% and 60%.In yet further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a bactericide in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of bactericides in theformulation, may be greater than, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%,30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, or 55%. In other exemplary embodiments, theamount of a thickener in the formulation, or the total amount of amixture of thickeners in the formulation, may be less than, for example,7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, or 55%. In someexemplary embodiments, the amount of a thickener in the formulation, orthe total amount of a mixture of thickeners in the formulation, may bebetween 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55% or 50% and60%.

Examples of the resistance inductors that may be used with theagriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are not limited to,fluoxastrobin, metominostrobin, hymexazol, acibenzolar-s-metil,mandestrobin, coumoxystrobin, flufenoxystrobin, mandestrobin,azoxystrobin, enoxastrobin, picoxystrobin, pyraoxystrobin,pyraclostrobin, pyrametostrobin, triclopyricarb, famoxadone,dimoxystrobin, fenaminstrobin, orysastrobin, kresoxim-methyl,trifloxystrobin, laminarin, and mixtures thereof. The amount ofresistance inductors present is not particularly limited. In someexemplary embodiments, the amount of a resistance inductor in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of resistance inductors inthe formulation, may be between 5% and 50%. In yet further exemplaryembodiments, the amount of a resistance inductor in the formulation, orthe total amount of a mixture of resistance inductors in theformulation, may be greater than, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%,30%, 35%, 40%, or 45%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of aresistance inductor in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixtureof resistance inductors in the formulation, may be less than, forexample, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, or 45%. In someexemplary embodiments, the amount of a resistance inductor in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of resistance inductors inthe formulation, may be between 5% and 15%, 15% and 25%, 25% and 35%,35% and 45% or 40% and 50%.

Examples of the biopesticides that may be used with the agriculturallyacceptable formulation include, but are not limited to, Bacillussubtillis, Bacillus amyloliquefasciens, carboxilic acids, oxolinicacids, Bacillus micoides, Trichoderma atriviride, quitosan, and mixturesthereof. The amount of biopesticides present is not particularlylimited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a biopesticide inthe formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of biopesticides inthe formulation, may be between 10% and 50%. In yet further exemplaryembodiments, the amount of a biopesticide in the formulation, or thetotal amount of a mixture of biopesticides in the formulation, may begreater than, for example, 12%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, or 45%. Inother exemplary embodiments, the amount of a biopesticide in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of biopesticides in theformulation, may be less than, for example, 12%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%,30%, 35%, 40%, or 45%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of abiopesticide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture ofbiopesticides in the formulation, may be between 10% and 15%, 15% and25%, 25% and 35%, 35% and 45% or 40% and 50%.

Examples of fungicides that may be used with the agriculturallyacceptable formulation include, but are not limited to chlorothalonil,PCNB (pentachloronitrobenzene), maneb, coppers, ziram, mancozeb,metalaxyl, benomyl, iprodione, tifluzamide, dimetomorph, myclobutanil,pentiopirad, fludioxonil, cyazofamid, thiabendazole, propamocarb,fenhexamid, boscalid, fluopicolide, extract of Reynoutria sachalinensis,triflumizole, iprodiona, propamocarb, prochloraz, tiabendazole,epoxiconazole, metalaxil, cymoxanil, picarbutrazox, and mixturesthereof. The amount of fungicides present is not particularly limited.In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a fungicide in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of fungicides in theformulation, may be between 5% and 75%. In yet further exemplaryembodiments, the amount of a fungicide in the formulation, or the totalamount of a mixture of fungicides in the formulation, may be greaterthan, for example, 7%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%,60%, 65%, or 70%. In other exemplary embodiments, the amount of afungicide in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture offungicides in the formulation, may be less than, for example, 7%, 10%,15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, 65%, or 70%. In someexemplary embodiments, the amount of a fungicide in the formulation, orthe total amount of a mixture of fungicides in the formulation, may bebetween 5% and 20%, 15% and 30%, 25% and 40%, 40% and 55%, 55% and 70%,or 60% and 75%.

Examples of foliage fertilizers that may be used with the agriculturallyacceptable formulation include, but are not limited to magnesium, boron,zinc, nitrogen, manganese, calcium, aluminum, chelates, iron,molybdenum, potassium, cobalt, copper, phosphite, sulfur, and aminoacids. The amount of foliage fertilizers present is not particularlylimited. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a foliagefertilizer in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture offoliage fertilizers in the formulation, may be between 0.0001% and 60%.In yet further exemplary embodiments, the amount of a foliage fertilizerin the formulation, or the total amount of a mixture of foliagefertilizers in the formulation, may be greater than, for example,0.0005%, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 5%, 15%, 25%,35%, 45%, or 55%. In yet further exemplary embodiments, the amount of afoliage fertilizer in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixtureof foliage fertilizers in the formulation, may be less than, forexample, 0.0005%, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 5%, 15%,25%, 35%, 45%, or 55%. In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of afoliage fertilizer in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixtureof foliage fertilizers in the formulation, may be between 0.0001% and0.001%, 0.01% and 0.1%, 0.1% and 1%, 1% and 10%, 5% and 25%, 15% and30%, 25% and 50%, or 40% and 60%.

Examples of hormones that may be used with the agriculturally acceptableformulation include, but are not limited to cytokinins, gibberellins,and auxins. The amount of hormones present is not particularly limited.In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of a hormone in theformulation, or the total amount of a mixture of hormones in theformulation, may be between 0.0001% and 20%. In yet further exemplaryembodiments, the amount of a hormone in the formulation, or the totalamount of a mixture of hormones in the formulation, may be greater than,for example, 0.0005%, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%,2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5%, 15%, or 17.5%. In yet further exemplaryembodiments, the amount of a hormone in the formulation, or the totalamount of a mixture of hormones in the formulation, may be less than,for example, 0.0005%, 0.001%, 0.005%, 0.01%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%,2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5%, 15%, or 17.5%. In some exemplaryembodiments, the amount of a hormone in the formulation, or the totalamount of a mixture of hormones in the formulation, may be between0.0001% and 0.001%, 0.01% and 0.1%, 0.1% and 1%, 1% and 5%, 5% and 10%,10% and 15%, or 15% and 20%.

Examples of other agriculturally acceptable materials that may be usedwith the agriculturally acceptable formulation include, but are notlimited to, copper sulfate, copper oxychloride, copper hydroxide,cuprocalcic sulfate, sulfur in all variants, copper gluconate, copperoctanoate, tribasic copper sulfate, calcium chloride, phosphoric acid,zinc oxide, phosphite, and mixtures thereof. The amount of otheragriculturally acceptable materials present is not particularly limited.In some exemplary embodiments, the amount of another agriculturallyacceptable material in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixtureof other agriculturally acceptable materials in the formulation, may bebetween 0.05% and 70%. In yet further exemplary embodiments, the amountof another agriculturally acceptable material in the formulation, or thetotal amount of a mixture of other agriculturally acceptable materialsin the formulation, may be greater than, for example, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%,5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%, 35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, or 65%. Inother exemplary embodiments, the amount of another agriculturallyacceptable material in the formulation, or the total amount of a mixtureof other agriculturally acceptable materials in the formulation, may beless than, for example, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, 30%,35%, 40%, 45%, 50%, 55%, 60%, or 65%. In some exemplary embodiments, theamount of another agriculturally acceptable material in the formulation,or the total amount of a mixture of other agriculturally acceptablematerials in the formulation, may be between 0.05% and 0.1%, 0.1% and0.5%, 0.5% and 1%, 1% and 5%, 5% and 15%, 15% and 25%, 25% and 40%, 40%and 50%, 50% and 60%, or 60% and 70%.

To form the agriculturally acceptable formulation, a pre-mixture oftannins may be used to which the other materials present in theagriculturally acceptable formulation may be added. An example of apre-mixture of tannins includes a mixture that contains about 65%tannins (a mixture of about 35.5% castalagin, about 23.3% vascalagin,about 2.0% castalin, and about 5.0% vescalin), about 15% sugars, andabout 15% bentonite, with the remainder being water (unless otherwisenoted, this pre-mixture will be referred to as Pre-Mixture A). Thecontents of the pre-mixture are not particularly limited, but anexemplary pre-mixture may comprise tannins, carbohydrates, andbentonite.

One exemplary formulation includes a mixture of 5% by mass ofPre-Mixture A and 95% by mass diatomaceous earth (e.g., 50 grams oftannins per kilogram of the formulation and 950 grams of diatomaceousearth per kilogram of the formulation).

Another exemplary formulation includes a mixture of 10% by mass ofPre-Mixture A and 90% by mass diatomaceous earth (e.g., 100 grams oftannins per kilogram of the formulation and 900 grams of diatomaceousearth per kilogram of the formulation).

Another exemplary formulation includes a mixture of 20% by mass ofPre-Mixture A and 80% by mass diatomaceous earth (e.g., 200 grams oftannins per kilogram of the formulation and 800 grams of diatomaceousearth per kilogram of the formulation).

Another exemplary formulation includes a mixture of Pre-Mixture A (200grams, 20% by mass), sodium lignosulfonate (40 grams, 4% by mass),naphthalene sulfonate (20 grams, 2% by mass), xanthan gum (5 grams,0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (735 grams, 73.50% by mass).

The agriculturally acceptable formulation of the present disclosure canbe, for example, deposited in and mixed with a reasonable amount ofwater to be sprinkled in very thin droplets of water “to the point ofdripping” via appropriate equipment to the crop that it is intended toprotect, in which pathogen damage may be present and would otherwisecontinue to harm the plants. The amount of water that may be mixed withthe agriculturally acceptable formulation may be, for example, 50 litersof water per 2 kilograms per hectare when applied by airplane; 1000liters of water per 2 kilograms per hectare when applied to plants via asprayer; 400-600 liters of water per 2 kilograms per hectare when usedon plants such as tomatoes, peppers, onions, and the like. The amount ofwater used is not particularly limited, however, and any dilution may beused so long as it provides for the anti-pathogenic effects disclosedherein.

The method by which the agriculturally acceptable formulation may beadministered to plants is not particularly restricted. Examples includethe application of the agriculturally acceptable formulation by airplaneor sprayer (such as an airblast sprayer, a manual sprayer, or amechanical sprayer). The agriculturally acceptable formulation may alsobe applied by a drencher, in which the agriculturally acceptableformulation is administered to the soil. In addition, the agriculturallyacceptable formulation may be applied to plants via irrigation systems.In certain instances, the agriculturally acceptable formulation may alsobe injected into a plant.

The agriculturally acceptable formulation may be applied to a plant, aplant's foliage, or may be applied to the soil. For example, theagriculturally acceptable formulation may be applied to the foliage,stem, canopy, trunk, roots, shoots, twigs, and/or flowers of a plant.The agriculturally acceptable formulation may also be applied to seedsand to a plant's rhizomes. The agriculturally acceptable formulation maybe applied to seedlings.

If applied to a plant or a plant's foliage, the agriculturallyacceptable formulation may be administered in an amount so as to providefor the bactericidal effect of the present disclosure. For example, theagriculturally acceptable formulation may be applied so as to administerthe amount of tannin necessary to provide for anti-pathogenic effects ofthe present invention. Such amounts may be determined based on theconcentration of tannins present in the agriculturally acceptableformulation. For example, an amount of 2 kilograms (diluted in anappropriate amount of water) per hectare of plants may be appropriate.The agriculturally acceptable formulation may be administered to plantsin intervals of, for example, 1-21 days, preferably intervals of 2-14days, and also preferably intervals of 3-7 days. However, the amountsand intervals are not limited thereto and may be determined based on theagriculturally acceptable formulation. The agriculturally acceptableformulation can be administered in the nursery stage, the seedlingstage, the transplant stage, the vegetative stage, pre-bloom, duringfull-bloom, post-bloom, and during fruit set. The agriculturallyacceptable formulation can also be administered during a plant'sdormancy.

The agriculturally acceptable formulation of the present disclosure maybe made by mixing together the materials listed above. The manner inwhich the materials are mixed is not particularly limiting. Theagriculturally acceptable formulation may then be added to apredetermined amount of water and, if necessary, water conditioner.

The agriculturally acceptable formulation is a bactericidal andfungicidal formulation that can be used in a wide variety of plants andplant species that have great economic importance. These include, butare not limited to, vegetables crops such as artichoke, asparagus, beet,beetroot, bell pepper, broccoli, brussels sprout, cabbage, carrot,cauliflower, celery, sweet corn, cucumber, eggplant, beans, green bean,onion, green onion, leek, lettuce, pea, pepper, potato, pumpkin, radish,spring onion, squash, sweet potato, tomato, zucchini, and mushrooms; aswell as cereal crops such as wheat, oats, corn, rice, barley, sorghum,triticale, quinoa, and the like; as well as fruit crops such as avocado,apple, pears, peaches, plum, banana, prune, citrus, lemons, oranges,pomegranate, papaya, mango, lychee, rambutan, strawberry, cranberry,blackberry, raspberry; as well as other crops such as nuts, pastures,sugar cane, and the like.

The agriculturally acceptable formulation has also shown benefits in thetreatment of nurseries and seedbeds, as well as in ornamental plants,such as flowers that include chrysanthemums, daisies, roses, begonias,gladiolas, geraniums, gardenias, and carnations. The agriculturallyacceptable formulation is also beneficial to protect shade trees, foresttrees, and annual and bi-annual crops from bacterial diseases.

As examples, a preparation of the agriculturally acceptable formulationis effective to control generally gram negative species and grampositive species, such Erwinia species, Pseudomonas species, Xanthomonasspecies, Pectobacterium species, Enterobacter species, Pantoea species,Streptomyces species, Phytoplasmas species, Corynebacterium species,Ralstonia species, Clavibacter species, and Agrobacterium species.Specifically bacteria that belong to the following species: Acetobacteraceti, Acetobacter pasteurianus, Acidovorax anthurii, Acidovorax avenae,Acidovorax avenae subsp. avenae, Acidovorax avenae subsp. cattleyae,Acidovorax avenae subsp. citrulli, Acidovorax konjaci, Acidovoraxvalerianellae, Acidovorax cattleyae, Acidovorax citrulli, Acidovoraxoryzae Rhizobium, Rhizobium larrymoorei, Rhizobium radiobacter,Rhizobium rhizogenes, Rhizobium rubi, Rhizobium viti. Arthrobacter sp.Arthrobacter ilicis, Bacillus sp., Bacillus megaterium, Bacillusmegaterium pv. cerealis, Bacillus pumilus, Brenneria alni, Brennerianigrifluens, Brenneria quercina, Brenneria rubrifaciens, Brenneriasalicis, Brenneeria quercina pv. quercina, Brenneeria quercina pv.lupinicola, Burkholderia andropogonis, Burkholderia caryophylli,Burkholderia cepacia, Burkholderia gladioli, Burkholderia gladioli pv.agaricicola, Burkholderia gladioli pv alliicola, Burkholderia gladiolipv. Gladioli, Burkholderia glumae, Burkholderia plantarii, Ralstoniasolanacearum, Candidatus liberibacter, Candidatus liberibacterafricanis, Candidatus liberibacter africanis subsp. capensis, Candidatusliberibacter americanus, Candidatus liberibacter asiaticus, Candidatusphlomobacter, Candidatus phlomobacter fragariae, Candidatus phytoplasma,Candidatus phytoplasma allocasuarinae, Candidatus phytoplasmaamericanum, Candidatus phytoplasma asteris, Candidatus phytoplasmaaurantifolia, Candidatus phytoplasma australasia, Candidatus phytoplasmaaustraliense, Candidatus phytoplasma brasiliense, Candidatus phytoplasmacaricae, Candidatus phytoplasma castaniae, Candidatus phytoplasmacynodontis, Candidatus phytoplasma fragariae, Candidatus phytoplasmafraxini, Candidatus phytoplasma graminis, Candidatus phytoplasmajaponicum, Candidatus phytoplasma lycopersici, Candidatus phytoplasmamali, Candidatus phytoplasma oryzae, Candidatus phytoplasma phoenicium,Candidatus phytoplasma pini, Candidatus phytoplasma prunorum, Candidatusphytoplasma pyri, Candidatus phytoplasma rhamni, Candidatus phytoplasmaspartii, Candidatus phytoplasma trifolii, Candidatus phytoplasma ulmi,Candidatus phytoplasma ziziphi, Candidatus phytoplasma omanense,Candidatus phytoplasma tamaricis, Candidatus liberibacter psyllaurous,Candidatus liberibacter solanacearum, Clavibacter sp, Rathayibacteriranicus, Clavibacter michiganensis, Clavibacter michiganensis subsp.insidiosus, Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. michiganensis, Clavibactermichiganensis subsp. nebraskensis, Clavibacter michiganensis subsp.sepedonicus, Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. tessellarium, Clostridiumsp. Clostridium puniceum. Corynebacterium sp. Curtobacterium sp.,Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. betae, Curtobacterium flaccumfacienspv. flaccumfaciens, Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. ilicis,Curtobacterium flaccumfaciens pv. oortii, Curtobacterium flaccumfacienspv. poinsettiae, Dickeya sp., Dickeya chrysanthemi, Dickeya chrysanthemipv. chrysanthemi, Dickeya chrysanthemi pv. parthenii, Dickeya dadantii,Dickeya diantbicola, Dickeya dieffenbachiae, Dickeya paradisiaca,Dickeya zeae, Enterobacter sp. Enterobacter cancerogenus, Enterobactercloacae, Enterobacter cloacae subsp dissolvens, Enterobacternimipressuralis, Enterobacter pyrinus, Erwinia sp., Erwinia amylovora,Erwinia mallotivora, Erwinia papayae, Erwinia persicina, Erwinia psidii,Erwinia pyrifoliae, Erwinia rhapontici, Erwinia tracheiphila, Ewingellasp., Ewingella americana, Gluconobacter sp. G. oxydans, Herbaspirillumsp., Herbaspirillum rubrisubalbicans, Janthinobacterium sp. J.agaricidamnosum, Leifsonia sp. Leifsonia cynodontis, Leifsonia xyli,Leifsonia xyli subsp. cynodontis, Leifsonia xyli subsp xyli, Nocardiasp., Nocardia vaccinii, Pantoea sp., Pantoea agglomerans, Pantoeaagglomerans pv. gypsophilae, Pantoea agglomerans pv. millettiae, Pantoeaananatis, Pantoea ananatis pv. ananatis, Pantoea ananatis pv. uredova,Pantoea stewartii, Pantoea stewartii subsp. indologenes, Pantoeastewartii subsp. stewartii, Pectobacterium sp., Pectobacteriumatrosepticum, Pectobacterium betavasculorum, Pectobacterium cacticida,Pectobacterium carotovorum, Pectobacterium carotovorum subsp.carotovorum, Pectobacterium carotovorum subsp. odoriferum,Pectobacterium cypripedii, Pectobacterium wasabiae, Pseudomonas sp.,Pseudomonas agarici, Pseudomonas amygdali, Pseudomonas asplenii,Pseudomonas avellanae, Pseudomonas beteli, Pseudomonas cannabina,Pseudomonas caricapapayae, Pseudomonas cichorii, Pseudomonas cissicola,Pseudomonas corrugata, Pseudomonas costantinii, Pseudomonasficuserectae, Pseudomonas flectens, Pseudomonas fuscovaginae,Pseudomonas hibiscicola, Pseudomonas marginalis, Pseudomonas matginalispv. alfalfae, Pseudomonas marginalis pv. marginalis Pseudomonasmarginalis pv. pastinacae, Pseudomonas mediterranea, Pseudomonas meliaePseudomonas palleroniana, Pseudomonas salomonii, Pseudomonas savastanoi,Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. glycinea,Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. nerii, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv.phaseolitica, Pseudomonas savastanoi pv. retacarpa, Pseudomonassavastanoi pv. savastanoi, Pseudomonas syringae, Pseudomonas syringaepv. aceris, Pseudomonas syringae pv. actinidiae, Pseudomonas syringaepv. aesculi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. alisalensis, Pseudomonas syringaepv. antirrhini, Pseudomonas syringae pv. apii, Pseudomonas syringae pv.aptata, Pseudomonas syringae pv. atrofaciens, Pseudomonas syringae pv.atropurpura, Pseudomonas avellanae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. avvi,Pseudomonas syringae pv. berberidis, Pseudomonas cannabina, Pseudomonassyringae pv. broussonetiae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. castaneae,Pseudomonas syringae pv cerasicola, Pseudomonas syringae pv. ciccaronei,Pseudomonas syringae pv coriandricola, Pseudomonas syringae pv.coronafaciens, Pseudomonas syringae pv. coryli, Pseudomonas syringae pv.cunninghamiae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. daphniphylli, Pseudomonassyringae pv. delphinii, Pseudomonas syringae pv. dendropanacis,Pseudomonas syringae pv. disoxyli, Pseudomonas syringae pv. eriobotryae,Pseudomonas syringae pv. garcae, Pseudomonas sevastanoi pv. glycineae,Pseudomonas syringae pv. helianthi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. hibisci,Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. lachrymans,Pseudomonas syringae pv lapsa, Pseudomonas syringae pv. maculicola,Pseudomonas syringae pv. mellea, Pseudomonas syringae pv. mori,Pseudomonas syringae pv. morsprunorum, Pseudomonas syringae pv. myricae,Pseudomonas syringae pv. oryzae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. papulans,Pseudomonas syringae pv. passiflorae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. persicae,Pseudomonas sevastanoi pv. phaseolicola, Pseudomonas syringae pv.philadelphi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. photiniae, Pseudomonas syringaepv. pisi, Pseudomonas syringae pv. porri, Pseudomonas syringae pv.primulae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. rhaphiolepidis, Pseudomonas syringaepv. ribicola, Pseudomonas syringae pv. sesami, Pseudomonas syringae pv.solidagae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. spinaceae, Pseudomonas syringae pv.striafaciens, Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae, Pseudomonas syringaepv. tabaci, Pseudomonas syringae pv. tagetis, Pseudomonas syringae pv.theae, Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato, Pseudomonas syringae pv. ulmi,Pseudomonas syringae pv. viburni, Pseudomonas syringae pv. zizaniae,Pseudomonas syringae pv., Ralstonia solanacearum, Ralstonia syzygii,Rathayibacter iranicus, Rathayibacter rathayi, Rathayibacter toxicus,Rathayibacter tritici, Rhizobacter dauci, Rhizobium larrymoorei,Rhizobium radiobacter, Rhizobium rhizogenes, Rhizobium rubi, Rhizobiumvitis, Rhodococcus fascians, Samsonia erythrinae, Serratia marcescens,Serratia proteamaculans, Sphingomonas melonis, Sphingomonassuberifasciens, Spriroplasma citri, Spriroplasma kunkelii, Spriroplasmaphoeniceum, Streptomyces acidiscabies, Streptomyces albidoflavus,Streptomyces candidus, Streptomyces caviscabies, Streptomyces collinus,Streptomyces europaeiscabiei, Streptomyces intermedius, Streptomycesipomocae, Streptomyces luridiscabiei, Streptomyces niveiscabiei,Streptomyces puniciscabiei, Streptomyces reticuliscabei, Streptomycesscabiei, Streptomyces setonii, Streptomyces steliiscabiei, Streptomycesturgidiscabieis, Streptomyces wedmorensis, Xanthomonas albilineans,Xanthomonas alfalfae, Xanthomonas alfalfae subsp. alfalfae, Xanthomonasalfalfae subsp. citrumelonis, Xanthomonas arboricola, Xanthomonasarboricola pv. celebensis, Xanthomonas arboricola pv. corylina,Xanthomonas arboricola pv. fragariae, Xanthomonas arboricola pv.juglandis, Xanthomonas anoxopodis pv. poinsettiicola, Xanthomonasarboricola pv. populi, Xanthomonas arboricola pv. pruni, Xanthomonasanoxopodis, Xanthomonas fuscans subsp. aurantifolii, Xanthomonasaxanopodis pv. Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. axonopodis, Xanthomonasaxonopodis pv. baubiniae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. begoniae,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. betlicola, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.biophyti, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. cajani, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.cassiae, Xanthomonas citri, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. clitoriae,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. coracanae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.cyamopsidis, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. desmodii, Xanthomonas axonopodispv. desmodiigangetici, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. desmodiilaxiflori,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. desmodiirotundifolii, Xanthomonas axonopodispv. dieffenbachiae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. erythrinae, Xanthomonasaxonopodis pv. fascicularis, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. glycines,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. khayae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.lespedezae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. maculifoliigardeniae, Xanthomonascitri subsp. malvacearum, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. manibotis,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. martyniicola, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.melbusii, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. nakataecorchori, Xanthomonascampestris pv. passiflorae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. patelii,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. pedalii, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phyllanthi, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.physalidicola, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. poinsettiicola, Xanthomonasaxonopodis pv. punicae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. rhynchosiae,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. ricini, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. sesbaniae,Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. tamarindi, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.vasculorum, Xanthomonas vesicatoria, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.vignaeradiatae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. vignicola, Xanthomonasaxonopodis pv. vitians, Xanthomonas bromi, Xanthomonas campestris,Xanthomonas campestris pv. aberrans, Xanthomonas campestris pv.armoraciae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. barbareae, Xanthomonas campestrispv. campestris, Xanthomonas campestris pv. incanae, Xanthomonascampestris pv. plantaginis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. raphani,Xanthomonas campestris pv. alangii, Xanthomonas campestris pv.amaranthicola, Xanthomonas campestris pv. amorphophalli, Xanthomonascampestris pv. aracearum. Xanthomonas campestris pv. arecae, Xanthomonascampestris pv. argemones, Xanthomonas campestris pv. arracaciae,Xanthomonas campestris pv. asclepiadis, Xanthomonas campestris pv.azadirachteae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. badrii, Xanthomonas campestrispv. betae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. bilvae, Xanthomonas campestris pv.blepharidis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. boerbaaviae, Xanthomonascampestris pv. brunneivaginae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. cannabis,Xanthomonas campestris pv. cannae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. carissae,Xanthomonas campestris pv. centellae, Xanthomonas campestris pv.clerodendri, Xanthomonas campestris pv. convolvuli, Xanthomonascampestris pv. coriandri, Xanthomonas campestris pv. daturae,Xanthomonas campestris pv. durantae, Xanthomonas campestris pv.esculenti, Xanthomonas campestris pv. eucalypti, Xanthomonas campestrispv. euphorbiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. fici, Xanthomonas campestrispv. guizotiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. gummisudans, Xanthomonascampestris pv. heliotropii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. ionidii,Xanthomonas campestris pv. lantanae, Xanthomonas campestris pv.laureliae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. lawsoniae, Xanthomonas campestrispv. leeana, Xanthomonas campestris pv. leersiae, Xanthomonas campestrispv. malloti, Xanthomonas campestris pv. mangiferaeindicae, Xanthomonascampestris pv. merremiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. mirabilis,Xanthomonas campestris pv. mori, Xanthomonas campestris pv. musacearum,Xanthomonas campestris pv. nigromaculans, Xanthomonas campestris pv.obscurae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. olitorii, Xanthomonas campestrispv. papavericola, Xanthomonas campestris pv. parthenii, Xanthomonascampestris pv. paulliniae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. pennamericanum,Xanthomonas campestris pv. phormiicola, Xanthomonas campestris pv.physalidis, Xanthomonas campestris pv. sesami, Xanthomonas campestrispv. spermacoces, Xanthomonas campestris syngonii, Xanthomonas campestrispv. tardicrescens, Xanthomonas campestris pv. thespesiae, Xanthomonascampestris pv. thirumalacharii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. tribuli,Xanthomonas campestris pv. trichodermae, Xanthomonas campestris pv.uppalii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. vernomiae, Xanthomonas campestrispv. viegasii, Xanthomonas campestris pv. viticola, Xanthomonascampestris pv. vitiscarnosae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. vitistrifoliae,Xanthomonas campestris pv. vitiswoodrowii, Xanthomonas campestris pv.zantedeschiae, Xanthomonas campestris pv. zingibericola, Xanthomonascampestris pv. zinniae, Xanthomonas cassavae, Xanthomonas citri subspmalvarearum, Xanthomonas codiaei, Xanthomonas curcubitae, Xanthomonascynarae, Xanthomonas euvesicatoria, Xanthomonas fragariae, Xanthomonasfuscans, Xanthomonas fuscans subsp. aurantifolii, Xanthomonas fuscanssubsp. fuscans, Xanthomonas gardneri, Xanthomonas hortorum pv. carotae,Xanthomonas hortorum pv. hederae, Xanthomonas hortorum pv. pelargonii,Xanthomonas hortorum pv. taraxaci, Xanthomonas hyacinthi, Xanthomonasmelonis, Xanthomonas oryzae, Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae, Xanthomonasoryzae pv. oryzicola, Xanthomonas perforans, Xanthomonas pisi,Xanthomonas populi, Xanthomonas sacchari, Xanthomonas theicola,Xanthomonas translucens, Xanthomonas translucens pv. arrhenatheri,Xanthomonas translucens pv. cerealis, Xanthomonas translucens pv.graminis, Xanthomonas translucens pv. phlei, Xanthomonas translucens pv.phleipratensis, Xanthomonas translucens pv. poae, Xanthomonastranslucens pv. secalis, Xanthomonas translucens pv. translucens,Xanthomonas translucens pv. undulosa, Xanthomonas vasicola, Xanthomonasvasicola pv. holcicola, Xanthomonas vesicatoria, Xylella fastidiosa,Xanthomonas fastidiosa subsp. fastidiosa, Xanthomonas fastidiosa subsp.multiplex, Xylophilus ampelinus, Gibbsiella quercinecans, Pantoeacitrea, Pantoea cypripedii, Pseudomonas cannabina, Pseudomonas cannabinapv. alisalensis, Pseudomonas cannabina pv. cannabina, Tatumellamorbirosei, Tatumella ptyseos, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. anacardii,Xanthomonas anoxopodis mangiferaeindicae, Xanthomonas axonopodis pv.spondiae, Xanthomonas dyei, Xanthomonas dyei pv. dysoxyli, Xanthomonasdyei pv. eucalypti, Xanthomonas dyei pv. laureliae, Xanthomonastranslucen pv. pistaciae.

Other plants, such as Cotoneaster, Pyracantha, Stranvaesia, Fraxinus,Pyrus, Malus, Capsicum, Cydonia, Crataegus, and Soreus can benefit fromthe application of the tannin-based agriculturally acceptableformulation. For example: the agriculturally acceptable formulationbased on tannins can also be used immediately in plants or trees of thefollowing genera:

Asparagus officinalis, Alocasia macrorhiza, Acoelorraphe wrightii,Aiphanes aculeata, Archontophoenix alexandrae, Areca catechu, Acernegundo, Acer saccharinum, Arbustus xalapensis, Acasia farmesiana, Alnusacuminata, Aloc barbadensis, Apuntia spp., Anthurium andraeanum, Apiumgraveolens, Avena sativa, Actinidia deliciosa, A. chinensis, A. erguta,Anacardium occidentale, Allium cepa, Allium schoenoprasum, Alliumfistulosum, A. ascalonicum, Annona reticulata, Amelanchier alnifolia, A.canadensis, A. laevia, Aronia arbutifolia, A. melanocarpa, Aruncussylvester, Allium sativum, Allium porrum, Apium gravolens, Arachishypogaea, Annona squamosa, Annona muricata, Acalypha hispida, Arachishypogaea, Allium schoeroprassum, Apium graveolens, Allium spp.,Adianthum spp, Brassica oleracea, B. campestris, B. napus, Byrsonimacrassifolia, Brassica oleracea, B. oleracea var. botrytisBrassicacapitate, Begonia argenteo-guttata, Bidens pilosa, Boldoa purpurascens,Bixa orellana, Bucida buceras, Buddleia cordata, Brahea armata, Betavulgaris, Bougainvillea spectabilis, Bombax emarginatum, Beaucamearecurvata, Bahuinia divaricata, Curcubita moschata, C. maxima, C. pepo,Cucumis melo, Cucumis sativus, Chrysophyllum cainito, Coco nucifera,Carica papaya, Citrus aurantifolia, Citrus limonum, Calocarpum mammosum,Citrus reticulata, Citrullus vulgaris, Citrus aurantium, Citrussinensis, Crataegus mexicana, Casimiroa edulis, Cucumis sativus,Colocasia esculenta, Cajanus cajan, Chamadorea graminofilia, Caladiumspp., Chlorophytum comosum, Chysanthemum sinense, Cordyline terminalis,Cycas spp., Crocus sativus, Cinnamomum canella wintereana, Castus ruber,Callistephus hortensis, Coriandrum sativum, Coleus blumei, Chysantellumamericanum, Casuarina equisetifolia, Cedrela odorata, Ceiba pentandra,Callistemon lanceolatus, Cassia fistula, Magnolia sp., Cocos nucifera,Chrysalidocarpus, Cyca circinalis, Cyca revoluta, Cynara cardunculus, C.scolymus, Citrus paradisi, Citrus grandis, Cestrum nocturnus,Chaenomeles japonica, C. lagenaria, Cotoneaster acuminatus, C. AdpressusBois, C. affinis, C. ambiguus, C. apiculatus, C. ascendens, C. bullatus,C. floribunda, C. buxifolius, C. buxifolius f. vellaea, C. commixtus, C.congestus, C. conspicuus, C. dammeri, C. dielsianus, C. divaricatus, C.elegans, C. floccosus, C. foveolatus, C. franchetti, C. (rigidus, C.glabratus, C. glaucophyllus, C. harrysmithii, C. henryanus, C.hissarcus, C. ignavus, C. insignia, C. horizontalis, C. khasiensis, C.lacteus, C. laxiflorus, C. lucidus, C. melanocarpus, C. microphyllus, C.moupinensis, C. multiflorus, C. nanshan, C. nitens, C. obscurus, C.obtusus, C. pannosus, C. perpusillus, C. polyanthemus, C. postratus, C.racemiflorus, C. roseus, C. rotundifolius, C. rubens, C. salsifolius, C.siminsii, C. soongoricus, C. spendens, C. stemianus, C. tenuipes, C.tormentosus, C. veitchii, C. villosulus, C. wardii, C. watereri, C,zabelii, Cowania stanburiana, Crataegomespilus dardarii, Crataegusarnoldiana, C. crusgalli, C. douglassi, C. flavellata, C. mollis, C.monogyna, C. oxyacantha, C. pedicellata, C. phaenopyrum, C. punctata, C.succulenta, C. uniflora, Capsicum annuum, Citrus sp., Cydonia oblonga,C. sinensis, Carya illinoinensis, Cocos nucifera, Chenopodiumambrosoides, Chamaerops humilis, Chamaedorea elegans, Citrusparadisi-reticulata, Catleya spp., Carum carvi, Chrysalidocarpuslutescens, Curcuma longa, Ceratozania mexicana, Caryota urens,Coccothrinax readii, Chamaedorea tepejilote, Coffea arabica, Dryas sp.,Dianthus caryophyllus, Dieffenbachia spp., Dracaena deremensis, Daucuscarota, Delonix regia, Dioscorea spp, Dypsis decaryi, Dicon espinolosum,Dicon edule, Daucus carota, Dracaena marginata, Delonix regia,Eriobotrya japonica, Exochorda sp., Eryobotria japonica, Echeveria spp.,Euphorbia pulcherrima, Enterolobium cyclocarpum, Erythrina crista-galli,Elaeis guineensislutences, Eryngium foetidum, Erythrina Americana,Fragaria X ananassa, F. virginiana, Ficus carica, Fraxinus uhdei, Ficuslirata, Fragaria vesca, Ficus benjamina, Ficus retusa, Foeniculumvulgare, Geum sp., G. herbaceum, G. barbadense, G. hirstiumlpomoesbatatas, Gossypium hirsutum, Glycine max, Geranium sp., Gardeniajasminoides, Gladiolus communis, Gerbera jamesonii, Guazuma ulmifolia,Grevillea robusta, Howea fosteriana, Hyophorbe lagenicaulis, Hibiscusrosa-sinensis, Helianthus annuus, Hoffinannia ghiresbreghtii,Helychrysum bracteanum, Heteromeles arbutifolia, Holodiscus discolor,Hibiscus elatus, Hyptis suaveolens, Helianthus tuberosus, Hibiscusesculentus, Higrangea macrophylla, Hedychium coronarium, Ixoraincarnata, Iris spp., Impatiens balsamina, Juglandis nigra, Juglansregia, Justicia pectoralis, Jacaranda mimosifolia, Kageneckia oblonga,Kerria japonica, Kalanchoe pinnata, Lactuca sativa, Lycopersiconesculentum, Licuala grandis, Licuala peltata, L. paludosa, L.orbicularis, Ligustrum japonicum, Livistona chinensis, Lippia sp., Lensculinaris, Liquidambar styracifiva, Lagerstroemia indica, Malpighiapunicifolia, Mammea americano, Melicocea bijuga, Mangifera indicaAnanascomosus, Musa paradisiaca, Musa balsisiana, Myrciaria cauliflora, Malusdomestica tomanthes tristaneae carpa Malus malus spp., Mespillusgermanica, Morus alba, Manihot esculenta, Medicago sativa, Monsteraspp., Murraya paniculata, Mysotis scorpioides, Mejorana hortensis,Mentha arvensis, Mentha nemorosa, Morus alba, Nepholepsis spp.,Nasturtium officinale, Nerium oleander, Osteomeles anthyllidfolia, Oryzasativa, Olea europea, Ocimum basilicum, Ocimum santum, P. capuli, P.allehaniensis, P. avium, P. besseyi, Prunus armeniaca, P. salicina, P.simonii, P. spinosa, P. triloba, P. mexicana, P. ceracifera, P.dasycarpa, P. domestica, P. fremontii, P. ilicifolia, P. lusitanica, P.mume, P. nigra, Prunus persica, Pyracantha angustifolia, P.atalantioides, P. coccinea, P. crenulata, P. crenulata var. kansuensis,P. fortuneana, P. koidzummi, P. rogersiana, P. umbellata, Phaseolusvulgaris, Psidium cattleianum, Photinia deflexa, P. glabra, P. villona,Physocarpus sp. Protentilia sp., Prinsepia sp., Pyrus communis, Pisumsativum, Pistacia vera, Prunus avium, Pachyrhizus erosus, Phyllantusacidus, Philodendron spp., Polianthes tuberosa, Pilea rotundifolia,Portulaca pilosa, Parkinsonia aculeata, Phoenix roebelenii, Pileamicrophylla, Pimpinella asisum, Piper auritum, Pluchea carolinensis,Populus tremuloides, Populus canadensis, Populus italica, Pithecellobiumdulce, Prosopis juliflora, Plumeria rubra, Platanus mexicanus, Phoenixdatilifera, Pritchardia pacifica, Phoenix roebelenii, Pandanus utilis,Pastinaca sativa, Persea americana, Pouteria campechiana, Psidiumguajaba, Punica granatum, Passiflora laurifolia, Peraphyllumramossissimum, Pachypodium lamerei, Phoenix canadiensis, Quercuslaurina, Quercus mexicana, Quercus rubra, Quercus rugosa, Quercusvirginiana, Raphiolepia indica, Rhodotypos scandens, Rosa blanda, R.multiflora, R. rubiginasa, R. rubrifolia, Rubus idaeos, Rheumrhabarbarum, Rumex acetosa, Ravenea rivularis, Rhapis excelsa, Roystonearegia, Rhoeo discolor, Rosmarinus officinalis, Rubus ulmifolius, Rosaspp, Rhoeo discolor, Raphanus sativus, Roystonea regia, Rhizophoramangle, Salycopersicum esculentum, Sorbaria sp., Sorbus americana, S.aria, S. aucuparia, S. mougeotii, S. occidentalis, S. tianshanica,Spiraea cantoniensis, S. densiflora, S. van houteii, SolanummeolongenaSechium edule, Spinacia olereasa, Scindapsus spp.,Spathyphyllum wallisii, Schefflera actinophylla, Sedum morganiarum,Sorghum bicolor, Salix bonplandiana, Schinus molle, Schinusterebinthefolius, Salix chilensis, Salix babylonica, Syagrusromanzoffiana, Scheelea liebmannii, Sabal palmetto, Sabal minor,Scorzonera hispanica, Saccharum officinarum, Spondias dulcis, Solanumtuberosum, Sansevieria spp, Strelitzia reginae, Tebebuia rosea, Tebebuiadonnell-smithiiTamarix gallica, Thrinax radiata, Tragopogon porrifolius,Thuja orientalis, Talinum palicunatum, Tithonia diversofilia, Theobromacacao, Tripticum aestivum, Tamarindus indica, Terminalia catapa, Ulmusparviflora, Vitis vinifera, Valerianella locusta, Vaccinium myrtillus,Vicia faba, Veitchia merrilli, Vetiveria zizanioides, Veitchia merilli,Verbena domingensis, Weddelia rugosa tenuis, Xanthosoma sugittifollum,Zea mays, Zinnia elegans, Zebrina pendula, Zingonium spp., Zanthoxylumpistacifolium, Zingiber cassumunar, Zamia furfuracea

Without wishing to be bound by theory, it is believed that tanninsaffect bacteria by actively modifying the environment where they grow,multiply and feed, developing a condition of hyper change.

Tannins react with the bacterial cell membrane and cause the death ofthe bacterial cell.

Bacteria are divided mainly into two groups (gram negative and grampositive), whose difference lies in the composition of their cell wall.Gram-negative bacteria have a single layer of peptidoglycan and asurface membrane composed of lipoproteins and glycoproteins, whilegram-positive bacteria do not have a surface membrane and contain manylayers of peptidoglycan, so their thickness is considerable.

The function of the cell wall is to shape and protect the interior ofthe cell from changes in pressure or exchange of extracellular fluids.This determines the survival of the cell. As mentioned above, the cellwall consists mainly of proteins in their different forms(phosphoproteins, glycoproteins, lipoproteins, and the like).Gram-negative bacteria contain a greater amount of proteins, whilegram-positive bacteria on the surface contain teichoic acid, which isformed by glycerol polymers and a few proteins.

For this reason, an organic agriculturally acceptable formulationcontaining ellagic tannins mainly damages gram-negative bacteria andfungus, and also damages gram-positive bacteria that may be susceptibleto the product.

Upon contact of the tannins with the cell wall, the cell wall is lysedand destroyed, and cell survival is compromised due to osmotic pressureand damage by external agents.

EXAMPLES

Some of the tests discussed herein were carried out in a laboratory, andobjectively show the bactericidal effect of the presently disclosedagriculturally acceptable formula based on tannins in differentconcentrations against five genera of bacteria which are the mostimportant that attack plants of economic importance.

For the relevant Examples, phytopathogenic strains, such as Xanthomonassp., Clavibacter sp., Erwinia sp., Pseudomonas sp., and Ralstonia sp.,were isolated from different fruits and vegetable crops. A mixture foragricultural use was developed in accordance with the followingdescriptions.

The sensitivity of bacteria to a given formulation was evaluated inpetri dishes using a poisoned food method, using agar culture mediamixed with the proper amount of the formulation. The poisoned foodmethod is commonly used to evaluate antifungal effects against molds,and the method was modified to test bacteria instead of mold. In themethod, the relevant formulation was incorporated into molten agar at adesired final concentration and mixed well. Then, the resulting mediumwas poured into petri dishes. After overnight pre-incubation, the petridishes containing the medium were inoculated with the relevant bacteria.After further incubation under suitable conditions for the bacterialstrain tested, the positive or negative growth in the control and sampleplates was measured. Thus, in brief, this methodology used the agar as avehicle for the product dose, and after solidification, a very highconcentration of bacterial suspension, was inoculated, while leaving acontrol petri dish inoculated with the same bacterial suspensioncontaining only agar without the formulation.

The respective formulation was mixed with agar to prepare theappropriate concentration for each example. For example, to form a 0.1grams per liter formulation, 0.1 grams of the formulation was added to 1liter of agar. It is understood that the results using agar willcorrespond to the results that would be obtained if using water insteadof agar. Thus, the results obtained using agar are understood tocorrespond to results that would be obtained if water were used as amedium.

Results were measured after 96 hours. The number of bacterial colonieswas counted by a technique that is based on counting the “colony formingunits,” or CFU, present in a gram or milliliter of the sample. It wasconsidered that each colony that develops in the culture medium ofchoice after a certain incubation time at the appropriate temperaturecomes from a microorganism, or an aggregate of them, of the sample understudy. It was also considered that the microorganism or microorganismswere capable of forming the colony, i.e., that the microorganism(s) is aCFU. To reliably count the colonies, the necessary decimal dilutions ofa sample were made before putting it in the culture medium. The mostcommon procedure for the enumeration of bacteria is the viable platecount. In this method, serial dilutions of a sample containing viablemicroorganisms were plated onto a suitable growth medium. The suspensionwas either spread onto the surface of agar plates (spread plate method),or was mixed with molten agar, poured into plates, and allowed tosolidify (pour plate method). The plates were then incubated underconditions that permitted microbial reproduction so that colonies thatcould be seen without the aid of a microscope were formed. It wasassumed that each bacterial colony arises from an individual cell thathas undergone cell division. Therefore, by counting the number ofcolonies and accounting for the dilution factor, the number of bacteriain the original sample was determined.

For the noted Examples, the results were positive, as discussed below,and showed a bactericide effect in some instances from a dose of 1 or 2grams per liter, where no bacterial growth was shown, as compared to acontrol that contained the bacterial suspension without any formulation.

As described below, some mixtures were assigned codes A5, B15, A, and+20. A5 described a composition that included Pre-Mixture A (21.98% bymass), gentamicin sulphate (8.08% by mass), sodium lignosulfonate (4% bymass), naphthalene sulfonate (2% by mass), xanthan gum (0.50% by mass),and diatomaceous earth (63.44% by mass). B15 described a compositionthat included Pre-Mixture A (21.98% by mass), oxytetracycline (15.69% bymass), sodium lignosulfonate (4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate (2% bymass), xanthan gum (0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (55.83% bymass). Composition A was a composition containing 20% by mass ofPre-Mixture A, 4% by mass of sodium lignosulfonate, 2% by mass ofnaphthalene sulfonate, 0.50% by mass fo xanthan gum, and 73.5% by massof diatomaceous earth. “+20” described a composition that includedPre-Mixture A (21.98% by mass), copper oxychloride (20% by mass), sodiumlignosulfonate (4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate (2% by mass), xanthangum (0.50% by mass), and diatomaceous earth (51.52% by mass).

In each formulation for the Examples herein, the diatomaceous earth(when used) was sterilized at 200° C. for 2 hours prior to its additionto the formulation.

Premixture

Where indicated, Pre-Mixture A was used. As noted above, Pre-Mixture Acontained about 65% tannins (a mixture of about 35.5% castalagin, about23.3% vascalagin, about 2.0% castalin, and about 5.0% vescalin), about15% sugars, and about 15% bentonite, with the remainder being water.

Example 1A

The effectiveness of the formulation on Clavibacter sp. was tested usingdifferent concentrations of the premixture of tannins in theformulations (e.g., 5%, 10%, and 20%) and by applying differentconcentrations of each formulation.

The formulation containing 5% of the premixture of tannins included amixture of 5% by mass of Pre-Mixture A and 95% by mass diatomaceousearth (50 grams of tannins per kilogram of the formulation and 950 gramsof diatomaceous earth per kilogram of the formulation).

The formulation containing 10% of the premixture of tannins included amixture of 10% by mass of Pre-Mixture A and 90% by mass diatomaceousearth (100 grams of tannins per kilogram of the formulation and 900grams of diatomaceous earth per kilogram of the formulation).

The formulation containing 20% of the premixture of tannins thatincluded a mixture of 20% by mass of Pre-Mixture A and 80% by massdiatomaceous earth (200 grams of tannins per kilogram of the formulationand 800 grams of diatomaceous earth per kilogram of the formulation).

FIGS. 1(a)-(c) show the results when the premixture of tannins waspresent in the formulation at an amount of 5% by mass. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 1(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 1(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 1(b) shows results when the formulation containing5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in a solutioncontaining 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation. FIG. 1(c)shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of thepremixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.1(a)-(c).

TABLE 1 Sample CFU’s Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3 g/L >2500.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L >250   2 g/L >250   4 g/L None visible  6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 1(a)-(c), effective doses of the 5%formulation in this test were deemed to be 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which werethe concentrations at which the Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lowerrate than the control. In the 4 g/L and 6 g/L concentrations, theClavibacter sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in theagar.

FIGS. 2(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 2(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 2(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 2(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 2(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.2(a)-(c).

TABLE 2 Sample CFU’s Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3 g/L >2500.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L None visible   4g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 2(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Clavibacter sp. grew ata much lower rate than the control. In the 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L concentrations, the Clavibacter sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 3(a)-(c) show the results when the premixture of tannins werepresent in the formulation at an amount of 20% by mass. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 3(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 3(a) shows results when theformulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 3(b) shows results when the formulation containing20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in a solutioncontaining 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation. FIG. 3(c)shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass of thepremixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.3(a)-(c).

TABLE 3 Sample CFU’s Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3 g/L >2500.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L Nonevisible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 3(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.5 g/L, 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L,and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Clavibacter sp.grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 0.5 g/L, 1 g/L, 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L concentrations, the Clavibacter sp. was notvisibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 1B

Example 1A was reproduced with the exception that the bacteria added tothe agar was diluted. In Example 1A, the bacteria that was added to theagar was obtained from a bacterial broth. For this Example, the bacteriaadded to the agar was obtained by diluting 1 mL of the bacterial brothused in Example 1A in 9 mL of saline solution, thereby forming a firstdiluted bacterial solution.

FIGS. 4(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 4(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 4(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 4(b) shows results when the formulation containing5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in a solutioncontaining 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation. FIG. 4(c)shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of thepremixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.4(a)-(c).

TABLE 4 Sample CFU’s Control 173 0.1 g/L 152 0.2 g/L 129 0.3 g/L 145 0.4g/L 198 0.5 g/L 147 1.0 g/L 124   2 g/L 141   4 g/L None visible   6 g/LNone visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 4(a)-(c), effective doses of the 5%formulation in this test were deemed to be 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which werethe concentrations at which the Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lowerrate than the control. In the 4 g/L and 6 g/L concentrations, theClavibacter sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in theagar.

FIGS. 5(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 5(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 5(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 5(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 5(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.5(a)-(c).

TABLE 5 Sample CFU’s Control 217 0.1 g/L 253 0.2 g/L 198 0.3 g/L 241 0.4g/L 243 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L None visible  4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 5(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Clavibacter sp. grew ata much lower rate than the control. In the 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L concentrations, the Clavibacter sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 6(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 6(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 6(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 6(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 6(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.6(a)-(c).

TABLE 6 Sample CFU’s Control 146 0.1 g/L 140 0.2 g/L 135 0.3 g/L 145 0.4g/L None visible 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L Nonevisible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 6(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which theClavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 0.4g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L concentrations, theClavibacter sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in theagar.

Example 1C

Example 1A was reproduced with the exception that the bacteria added tothe agar was diluted. For this Example, the bacteria added to the agarwas obtained by adding 1 mL of the first diluted bacterial solution ofExample 1B to 9 mL of saline solution, thereby forming a second dilutedbacterial solution.

FIGS. 7(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 7(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 7(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 7(b) shows results when the formulation containing5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in a solutioncontaining 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation. FIG. 7(c)shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass of thepremixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2 g/L, 4g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.7(a)-(c).

TABLE 7 Sample CFU’s Control 18 0.1 g/L 15 0.2 g/L 13 0.3 g/L 17 0.4 g/L23 0.5 g/L 22 1.0 g/L 24   2 g/L 12   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L Nonevisible

As can be seen from FIGS. 7(a)-(c), effective doses of the 5%formulation in this test were deemed to be 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which werethe concentrations at which the Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lowerrate than the control. In the 4 g/L and 6 g/L concentrations, theClavibacter sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in theagar.

FIGS. 8(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 8(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 8(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 8(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 8(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.8(a)-(c).

TABLE 8 Sample CFU’s Control 31 0.1 g/L 26 0.2 g/L 30 0.3 g/L 37 0.4 g/L35 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L None visible   4g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 8(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4g/L, and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Clavibactersp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L,2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L concentrations, the Clavibacter sp. was notvisibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 9(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 9(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 9(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 9(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 9(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.9(a)-(c).

TABLE 9 Sample CFU’s Control 27 0.1 g/L 23 0.2 g/L 21 0.3 g/L 12 0.4 g/LNone visible 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L Nonevisible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 9(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which theClavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 0.4g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L concentrations, theClavibacter sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in theagar.

Example 2A

The effectiveness of the formulation on Erwinia sp. was tested in thesame manner as Example 1A, with the exception that Erwinia sp. was thebacteria.

FIGS. 10(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 10(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 10(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 10(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in asolution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 10(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.10(a)-(c).

TABLE 10 Sample CFU’s Control 210 0.1 g/L 240 0.2 g/L 240 0.3 g/L 2300.4 g/L 110 0.5 g/L 250 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L None visible   4g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 10(a)-(c), effective doses of the 5%formulation in this test were deemed to be 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Erwinia sp. grew at amuch lower rate than the control. In the 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L concentrations, the Erwinia sp. was not visibly present, and hencedid not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 11(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 11(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 11(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 11(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 11(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.11(a)-(c).

TABLE 11 Sample CFU’s Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/LNone visible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 11(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4g/L, and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Erwinia sp.grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L concentrations, the Erwinia sp. was not visiblypresent, and hence did not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 12(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 12(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 12(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 12(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 12(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.12(a)-(c).

TABLE 12 Sample CFU’s Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L None visible 0.3g/L None visible 0.4 g/L None visible 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L Nonevisible   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 12(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.2 g/L, 0.3 g/L, 0.4 g/L,0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L, which were the concentrationsat which the Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. Inthe 0.2 g/L, 0.3 g/L, 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Erwinia sp. was not visibly present, and hence didnot grow in the agar.

Example 2B

The conditions of Example 1B were reproduced, with the exception thatErwinia sp. was the bacteria.

FIGS. 13(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 13(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 13(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 13(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in asolution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 13(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.13(a)-(c).

TABLE 13 Sample CFU’s Control 31 0.1 g/L 35 0.2 g/L 22 0.3 g/L 22 0.4g/L 27 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L None visible  4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 13(a)-(c), effective doses of the 5%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4g/L, and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Erwinia sp.grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L concentrations, the Erwinia sp. was not visiblypresent, and hence did not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 14(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 14(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 14(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 14(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 14(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.14(a)-(c).

TABLE 14 Sample CFU’s Control 11 0.1 g/L 7 0.2 g/L 7 0.3 g/L 7 0.4 g/LNone visible 0.5 g/L None visible 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L Nonevisible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 14(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L, which were the concentrations at which theErwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 0.4 g/L,0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L concentrations, the Erwiniasp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 15(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 15(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 15(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 15(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 15(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.15(a)-(c).

TABLE 15 Sample CFU’s Control >250 0.1 g/L None visible 0.2 g/L Nonevisible 0.3 g/L None visible 0.4 g/L None visible 0.5 g/L None visible1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/LNone visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 15(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, 0.3 g/L,0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L, which were theconcentrations at which the Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate thanthe control. In the 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, 0.3 g/L, 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, 1.0g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L concentrations, the Erwinia sp. was notvisibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 3A

The effectiveness of the formulation on Pseudomonas sp. was tested inthe same manner as Example 1A, with the exception that Pseudomonas sp.was the bacteria.

FIGS. 16(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 16(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 16(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 16(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in asolution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 16(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.16(a)-(c).

TABLE 16 Sample CFU's Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L >250   2 g/L >250   4 g/LNone visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 16(a)-(c), effective doses of the 5%formulation in this test were deemed to be 4 g/L and 6 g/L, which werethe concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew at a much lowerrate than the control. In the 4 g/L and 6 g/L concentrations, thePseudomonas sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in theagar.

FIGS. 17(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 17(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 17(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 17(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 17(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.17(a)-(c).

TABLE 17 Sample CFU's Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L >250   2 g/L None visible   4g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 17(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew at amuch lower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Pseudomonas sp. was not visibly present, and hencedid not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 18(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 18(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 18(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 18(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 18(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.18(a)-(c).

TABLE 18 Sample CFU's Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L Nonevisible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 18(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew ata much lower rate than the control. In the 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L concentrations, the Pseudomonas sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

Example 3B

The conditions of Example 1B were reproduced, with the exception thatPseudomonas sp. was the bacteria.

FIGS. 19(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 19(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 19(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 19(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in asolution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 19(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.19(a)-(c).

TABLE 19 Sample CFU's Control 32 0.1 g/L 32 0.2 g/L 32 0.3 g/L 28 0.4g/L 26 0.5 g/L 32 1.0 g/L 29   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L None visible  6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 19(a)-(c), effective doses of the 5%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew at amuch lower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Pseudomonas sp. was not visibly present, and hencedid not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 20(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 20(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 20(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 20(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 20(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.20(a)-(c).

TABLE 20 Sample CFU's Control 148 0.1 g/L 152 0.2 g/L 146 0.3 g/L 1370.4 g/L 140 0.5 g/L 123 1.0 g/L 137   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L Nonevisible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 20(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew at amuch lower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Pseudomonas sp. was not visibly present, and hencedid not grow in the agar.

FIGS. 21(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 21(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 21(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 21(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 21(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.21(a)-(c).

TABLE 21 Sample CFU's Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L Nonevisible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 21(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Pseudomonas sp. grew ata much lower rate than the control. In the 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L concentrations, the Pseudomonas sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

Example 4A

The effectiveness of the formulation on Ralstonia sp. was tested in thesame manner as Example 1A, with the exception that Ralstonia sp. was thebacteria.

FIGS. 22(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 22(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 22(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 22(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in asolution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 22(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.22(a)-(c).

TABLE 22 Sample CFU's Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L >250   2 g/L >250   4g/L >250   6 g/L >250

As can be seen from FIGS. 22(a)-(c), higher concentrations may benecessary to be effective for this test.

FIGS. 23(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 23(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 23(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 23(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 23(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.23(a)-(c).

TABLE 23 Sample CFU's Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L >250   2 g/L None visible   4g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 23(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a muchlower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Ralstonia sp. was not visibly present, and hence didnot grow in the agar.

FIGS. 24(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 24(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 24(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 24(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 24(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.24(a)-(c).

TABLE 24 Sample CFU's Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L >250   2 g/L None visible   4g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 24(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a muchlower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Ralstonia sp. was not visibly present, and hence didnot grow in the agar.

Example 4B

The conditions of Example 1B were reproduced, with the exception thatRalstonia sp. was the bacteria.

FIGS. 25(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 25(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 25(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 25(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in asolution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 25(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.25(a)-(c).

TABLE 25 Sample CFU's Control 98 0.1 g/L 104  0.2 g/L 97 0.3 g/L 93 0.4g/L 93 0.5 g/L 94 1.0 g/L 104    2 g/L 126    4 g/L 99   6 g/L 96

As can be seen from FIGS. 25(a)-(c), a higher concentration may benecessary to be effective in this test.

FIGS. 26(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 26(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 26(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 26(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 26(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.26(a)-(c).

TABLE 26 Sample CFU's Control 171 0.1 g/L 172 0.2 g/L 188 0.3 g/L 1740.4 g/L 158 0.5 g/L 171 1.0 g/L 194   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L Nonevisible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 26(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a muchlower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Ralstonia sp. was not visibly present, and hence didnot grow in the agar.

FIGS. 27(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 27(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 27(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 27(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 27(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.27(a)-(c).

TABLE 27 Sample CFU's Control 144 0.1 g/L 127 0.2 g/L 138 0.3 g/L 1780.4 g/L 170 0.5 g/L 162 1.0 g/L 198   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L Nonevisible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 27(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a muchlower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Ralstonia sp. was not visibly present, and hence didnot grow in the agar.

Example 4C

The conditions of Example 1C were reproduced, with the exception thatRalstonia sp. was the bacteria.

FIGS. 28(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 5% by mass of the premixture. The upper lefthand petri dish in each of FIGS. 28(a)-(c) are the control petri dishes,in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 28(a) shows results when theformulation containing 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins wasadministered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/L ofthe formulation. FIG. 28(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 5% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered in asolution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 28(c) shows results when the formulation containing 5% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.28(a)-(c).

TABLE 28 Sample CFU's Control 13 0.1 g/L 12 0.2 g/L 13 0.3 g/L 13 0.4g/L  8 0.5 g/L 11 1.0 g/L 11   2 g/L 13   4 g/L  9   6 g/L 10

As can be seen from FIGS. 28(a)-(c), a higher concentration may benecessary to be effective in this test.

FIGS. 29(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 10% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 29(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 29(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 10% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 29(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 10% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 29(c) shows results when the formulation containing 10% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.29(a)-(c).

TABLE 29 Sample CFU's Control 26 0.1 g/L 26 0.2 g/L 27 0.3 g/L 24 0.4g/L 22 0.5 g/L 18 1.0 g/L 24   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L None visible  6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 29(a)-(c), effective doses of the 10%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a muchlower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Ralstonia sp. was not visibly present, and hence didnot grow in the agar.

FIGS. 30(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 30(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 30(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 30(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 30(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.30(a)-(c).

TABLE 30 Sample CFU's Control 25 0.1 g/L 17 0.2 g/L 19 0.3 g/L 19 0.4g/L 20 0.5 g/L 21 1.0 g/L 13   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L None visible  6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 30(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L,which were the concentrations at which the Ralstonia sp. grew at a muchlower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/Lconcentrations, the Ralstonia sp. was not visibly present, and hence didnot grow in the agar.

Example 5A

The effectiveness of the formulation on Xanthomonas sp. was tested inthe same manner as Example 1A, with the exception that Xanthomonas sp.was the bacteria.

FIGS. 31(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 31(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 31(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 31(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 31(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.31(a)-(c).

TABLE 31 Sample CFU's Control >250 0.1 g/L >250 0.2 g/L >250 0.3g/L >250 0.4 g/L >250 0.5 g/L >250 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L Nonevisible   4 g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 31(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Xanthomonas sp. grew ata much lower rate than the control. In the 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L concentrations, the Xanthomonas sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

Example 5B

The conditions of Example 1B were reproduced, with the exception thatXanthomonas sp. was the bacteria.

FIGS. 32(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 32(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 32(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 32(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 32(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.32(a)-(c).

TABLE 32 Sample CFU's Control 120 0.1 g/L 120 0.2 g/L 100 0.3 g/L 97 0.4g/L 120 0.5 g/L 100 1.0 g/L 12   2 g/L None visible   4 g/L None visible  6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 32(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Xanthomonas sp. grew ata much lower rate than the control. In the 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L concentrations, the Xanthomonas sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

Example 5C

The conditions of Example 1C were reproduced, with the exception thatXanthomonas sp. was the bacteria.

FIGS. 33(a)-(c) show the results when the tannins were present in theformulation at an amount of 20% by mass of the premixture. The upperleft hand petri dish in each of FIGS. 33(a)-(c) are the control petridishes, in which no formulation was applied. FIG. 33(a) shows resultswhen the formulation containing 20% by mass of the premixture of tanninswas administered in a solution containing 0.1 g/L, 0.2 g/L, and 0.3 g/Lof the formulation. FIG. 33(b) shows results when the formulationcontaining 20% by mass of the premixture of tannins was administered ina solution containing 0.4 g/L, 0.5 g/L, and 1.0 g/L of the formulation.FIG. 33(c) shows results when the formulation containing 20% by mass ofthe premixture of tannins was administered in a solution containing 2g/L, 4 g/L, and 6 g/L of the formulation.

The Table below shows the number of CFU's in the petri dishes in FIGS.33(a)-(c).

TABLE 33 Sample CFU's Control 120 0.1 g/L 160 0.2 g/L 130 0.3 g/L 1000.4 g/L 150 0.5 g/L 130 1.0 g/L None visible   2 g/L None visible   4g/L None visible   6 g/L None visible

As can be seen from FIGS. 33(a)-(c), effective doses of the 20%formulation in this test were deemed to be 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Xanthomonas sp. grew ata much lower rate than the control. In the 1.0 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, and 6g/L concentrations, the Xanthomonas sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

Example 6

The testing conditions of Example 1C were repeated, except that each ofcompositions A5, B15, A, and +20 were individually used in place of theformulations used in Example 1C. Compositions A, A5, B15, and +20 weretested against Clavibacter sp., using a control, at concentrations of 1g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L.

FIG. 34 shows the results of the test using composition A5. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition A5 showedthe antibacterial effect of composition A5.

FIG. 35 shows the results of the test using composition B15. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition B15showed the antibacterial effect of composition B15.

FIG. 36 shows the results of the test using composition +20. The controland the 1 g/L composition exhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack ofbacterial growth in the petri dishes exposed to 2 g/L and 4 g/L ofcomposition +20 showed the antibacterial effect of composition +20.

FIG. 37 shows the results of the test using Composition A. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of Composition A showedthe antibacterial effect of Composition A.

Example 7

The testing conditions of Example 2C were repeated, except that each ofcompositions A5, B15, A, and +20 were individually used in place of theformulation used in Example 2. Compositions A5, B15, and +20 were testedagainst Erwinia sp., using a control, at concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L,and 4 g/L.

FIG. 38 shows the results of the test using composition A5. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition A5 showedthe antibacterial effect of composition A5.

FIG. 39 shows the results of the test using composition B15. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition B15showed the antibacterial effect of composition B15.

FIG. 40 shows the results of the test using composition +20. The controland the 1 g/L composition exhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack ofbacterial growth in the petri dishes exposed to 2 g/L and 4 g/L ofcomposition +20 showed the antibacterial effect of composition +20.

FIG. 41 shows the results of the test using Composition A. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of Composition A showedthe antibacterial effect of Composition A.

Example 8

The testing conditions of Example 4C were repeated, except that each ofcompositions A5, B15, A, and +20 were individually used in place of theformulation used in Example 4. Compositions A5, B15, A, and +20 weretested against Ralstonia sp., using a control, at, e.g., concentrationsof 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L.

FIG. 42 shows the results of the test using composition A5. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition A5 showedthe antibacterial effect of composition A5.

FIG. 43 shows the results of the test using composition B15. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition B15showed the antibacterial effect of composition B15.

FIGS. 44(a) and (b) show the results of the test using composition +20.The control exhibited bacterial growth, as did the petri dishes exposedto 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition +20, whereas lack of bacterialgrowth in the petri dishes exposed to 14 g/L, 16 g/L, and 18 g/L ofcomposition +20 showed the antibacterial effect of composition +20.

FIGS. 45(a) and (b) show the results of the test using Composition A.The control and the compositions containing 12 g/L, 14 g/L, and 16 g/Lexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 12 g/L, 14 g/L, and 16 g/L of Composition Ashowed the antibacterial effect of Composition A.

Example 9

The testing conditions of Example 5C were repeated, except that each ofcompositions A5, B15, A, and +20 were individually used in place of theformulation used in Example 5. Compositions A5, B15, A, and +20 weretested against Xanthomonas sp., using a control, at, e.g.,concentrations of 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L.

FIG. 46 shows the results of the test using composition A5. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition A5 showedthe antibacterial effect of composition A5.

FIG. 47 shows the results of the test using composition B15. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of composition B15showed the antibacterial effect of composition B15.

FIGS. 48(a)-(c) show the results of the test using composition +20. Thecontrol exhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth inthe petri dishes exposed to 14 g/L, 16 g/L, and 18 g/L of composition+20 showed the antibacterial effect of composition +20.

FIG. 49 shows the results of the test using Composition A. The controlexhibited bacterial growth, whereas lack of bacterial growth in thepetri dishes exposed to 1 g/L, 2 g/L, and 4 g/L of Composition A showedthe antibacterial effect of Composition A.

Example 10

An agriculturally acceptable formulation was created having acomposition of a mixture of Pre-Mixture A (200 grams, 20% by mass),sodium lignosulfonate (40 grams, 4% by mass), naphthalene sulfonate (20grams, 2% by mass), xanthan gum (5 grams, 0.50% by mass), anddiatomaceous earth (735 grams, 73.50% by mass).

The agriculturally acceptable formulation at a concentration of 2000g/1000 L of solution was tested, alongside an untreated control, towhich no type of antibiotic was applied during the test, in an appleorchard that had a history of strong disease (Erwinia amylovora)pressure. The orchard contained and was surrounded by conditionsconducive to the development of the disease such as: high moisturecontent in the upper part of the subsoil, adjacent orchards that had theGala apple variety with a high contamination in previous years, and amanifestation of zooglea pre-sprouting in its own sectors, which led tothe decision to plant new trees in the orchard. The cultivation that wastested was an apple tree of the variety Golden Smoothie.

In this test, five applications were made on 220 trees, using 250 litersof water to cover ¼ Ha (hectare) with an airblast sprayer. Trees in thetreatment area were sprayed using an airblast sprayer until water runoff covering 4 rows. Sprays were timed to coincide with the tree fruitbloom and petal fall. The test area was sprayed once every 6-9 daysduring bloom season. Thus, the pre-bloom period was covered as well asthe flowering period.

The applications were made on the following days at the followingdosages:

TABLE 34 Date Dosage Day 1  500 g/Ha Day 9  1 kg/Ha Day 15 1 kg/Ha Day24 1 kg/Ha Day 33 1 kg/Ha

An evaluation was made on Day 38, a date in which any infection causedby the disease during the bloom period (blossom blight) would bevisible.

The experiment was arranged in a paired T-test. Data were analyzedthrough a T-Test analysis using the statistical package R (R Core Team(2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. RFoundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URLhttps://www.R-project.org/). As noted above, one evaluation was made 5days after the last spray. Mean data of the number of blossom infectionper tree was collected. Data collected from the orchard showed that theeffect of the new antibacterial formulation based on tannins wassignificant (P<0.05). Compared with the untreated control, the newantibacterial formulation based on tannins controlled the blossom blightinfection.

FIGS. 50(a) and (b) show examples of blossom blight that were measuredduring this test. Table 35 shows the statistics measured in this test.FIG. 51 is a graphical representation of the data in Table 35.

TABLE 35 Mean number of blossom blights per tree Tree row Treated treesControl 1  3 62 2 25 70 3 39 66 4 28 59

The Shapiro-Wilk normality test value is W=0.91053 with a p-value of0.3578. The t value of this data was −5.1178, with a df value of 6 and ap-value of 0.002183.

This experiment showed that the new antibacterial formulation based ontannins showed an effect in decreasing the amount of infected blossomshoots against the control (which was not exposed to the formulation).This is important because each infected bud (blossom blight) is a pointof production that is lost during the following 4 years. That is, theproductive wood of that floral bud, apart from generating zeroproduction in year of its infection, loses its productive value,generating fruit wood compensation costs and latent risks of futureinfections.

Example 11

In this experiment, a shoot blights infection (Erwinia amylovora) afterflowering was present in a Gala apple variety.

In this particular batch, a hail event occurred, and due to the woundsfrom the hail, an initial shoot blight outbreak occurred. Pruning of theinfected initial shoots occurred in both the treatment lot and thecontrol lot, after which the new antibacterial formulation based ontannins was applied to the treatment lot.

Four applications of the new antibacterial formulation based on tanninswere scheduled so as to cover the season of high relative humidity dueto rain. The applications were made on Day 1, Day 6, Day 11, and Day 18;at a dose of 2.0 kg/Ha.

The applications of the new antibacterial formulation based on tanninswere made with an airblast sprayer machine using 1000 liters of solutionper Ha, covering 9 rows of 47 trees each. Both in the treated area andin the control, a useful plot of 5 rows was measured. Evaluations weremade counting the number of shoot blights per tree on Day 15 and Day 28.

The formulation that was applied in this Example was the formulationdescribed in Example 10 at a concentration of 2000 g of formulation per1000 liters of water. Trees in the treatment area were sprayed using anairblast sprayer until water run off. In this test, sprays were timedevery 5 days post-petal fall to cover further shoot infections, known as“shoot blights.” The test area was sprayed once every 5 days for threecycles, and one time 7 days after the third application. The experimentwas arranged in a paired T-test. Data were analyzed through a T-Testanalysis using the statistical package R (R Core Team (2016). R: Alanguage and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation forStatistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL https://www.R-project.org/).A first evaluation was made 4 days after the third spray. Data of thenumber of shoot blights per row was collected. Data collected from thistest in the first evaluation showed that the effect of the invention wassignificant (P<0.05). Compared with the untreated control, the newantibacterial formulation based on tannins controlled the post-petalfall infection known as shoot blights (see Table 36). FIG. 52 is agraphical representation of the data in Table 3.

TABLE 36 Mean number of shoot blights per row Tree row Treated treesControl 1  42 256 2  24 363 3 100 234 4 113 215 5 124  95

The Shapiro-Wilk normality test value was W=0.93245, with a p-value of0.4724. The mean in the treated group was 80.6, whereas the mean in theuntreated group was 232.6, thus exemplifying the antibacterial effect ofthis composition. The t value of this data was −3.2116, with a df valueof 8 and a p-value of 0.0124.

A second evaluation was made 10 days after the fourth spray. Field datawere transformed (log [y]) to reduce variance. Data collected from thistest in the second evaluation showed that the effect of the newantibacterial formulation based on tannins was significant (P<0.05).Compared with the untreated control, the new antibacterial formulationbased on tannins controlled the post-petal fall infection known as shootblights (see Table 4). FIG. 53 is a graphical representation of the datain Table 37.

TABLE 37 Mean number of shoot blights per row transformed (log [y]) Treerow Treated trees Control 1 1.982271 2.891537 2 1.845098 2.869232 31.851258 2.826075 4 2.313867 2.866878 5 2.1959  2.356026

The Shapiro-Wilk value of this transformed data was W=0.8547, with ap-value of 0.06605. The mean in the treated group was 2.037679, whereasthe mean in the untreated group was 2.761950, thereby illustrating theantibacterial effect of this composition. The t value of this data was−5.2241, with a df of 8 and a p-value of 0.0007986.

Linear prediction maps (Kriging) were made after Day 28 and are shown inFIGS. 54(a) and (b). FIG. 54(a) shows the number of shoot blights in thearea treated with the new antibacterial formulation based on tannins.FIG. 54(b) shows the control area, which was adjacent to the test area.The images simulate an aerial view of the crop, where with each of thevalues of shoot blight, an interpolation was made between the points (inthis Example, apple trees). The scale on the right indicates the colorsassigned by number of infected shoots (shoot blights), the white colorsbeing the indicator of the greatest number of infected spots in thearea.

This Example shows that the use of the new antibacterial formulationbased on tannins in the cultivation of Gala apple trees at a rate of 2kg/ha provides for a significant improvement against an untreatedcontrol in terms of the mean number of infected shoots per row (shootblights).

Example 12

An agriculturally acceptable formulation was created having thecomposition of Example 10—a mixture of Pre-Mixture A (200 grams, 20% bymass), sodium lignosulfonate (40 grams, 4% by mass), naphthalenesulfonate (20 grams, 2% by mass), xanthan gum (5 grams, 0.50% by mass),and diatomaceous earth (735 grams, 73.50% by mass). A solution of theagriculturally acceptable formulation in water was created, having aconcentration of 7.5 grams of the agriculturally acceptable formulationper liter. 37.5 g of the solution was weighed and added to agar, usingthe poisoned food technique of Example 1A.

The pathogenic fungus Alternaria sp. was added to the agar and wasincubated at 28° C. for 120 hours. This was repeated in four petridishes. Following incubation, an evaluation was made in which themeasurements of the fungal growth diameters in the agriculturallyacceptable formulation-containing agar was compared with the diameter offour controls which contained the agriculturally acceptable formulationbut did not contain the pathogenic fungus. A Percentage of Inhibitionwas calculated from each sample using the following formula, and themean of the four repetitions was taken as the inhibition percentage forthe Example:

Percentage of Inhibition=((Radial growth of the control−Radial growth ofthe pathogen)/Radial growth of the control))*100

FIG. 55 shows the results of the test, and shows that the agriculturallyacceptable formulation inhibited the growth of Alternaria sp. FIG. 55(a)is the control, and FIG. 55(b) is the tested composition. The inhibitionpercentage for Alternaria sp. was measured to be 51.4%.

Example 13

The conditions of Example 12 were reproduced, with the exception thatthe pathological fungus was Phytophthora sp. FIG. 56 shows the resultsof the test, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulationinhibited the growth of Phytophthora sp. FIG. 56(a) is the control, andFIG. 56(b) is the tested composition. The inhibition percentage forPhytophthora sp. was measured to be 100%.

Example 14

The conditions of Example 12 were reproduced, with the exception thatthe pathological fungus was Colletotrichum sp. FIG. 57 shows the resultsof the test, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulationinhibited the growth of Colletotrichum sp. FIG. 57(a) is the control,and FIG. 57(b) is the tested composition. The inhibition percentage forColletotrichum sp. was measured to be 100%.

Example 15A

The conditions of Example 12 were reproduced, with the exception thatthe pathological fungus was Fusarium sp. FIG. 58 shows the results ofthe test, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulationinhibited the growth of Fusarium sp. FIG. 58(a) is the control, and FIG.58(b) is the tested composition. The inhibition percentage for Fusariumsp. was measured to be 69.49%.

Example 15B

The conditions of Example 15A were reproduced, with the exception thatthe composition tested was a tannin composition extracted from Quebrachotree (genus Schinopsis) (composition “QAMAEA6Q03”). FIG. 59 shows theresults of the test, and shows that the agriculturally acceptableformulation inhibited the growth of Fusarium sp. FIG. 59(a) is thecontrol, and FIG. 59(b) is the tested composition. The inhibitionpercentage for Fusarium sp. was measured to be 64.89%.

Example 15C

The conditions of Example 15A were reproduced, with the exception thatthe composition tested was a tannin composition extracted from Acaciatree (genus Acacia) (composition “QAMMSAPA06”). FIG. 60 shows theresults of the test, and shows that the agriculturally acceptableformulation inhibited the growth of Fusarium sp. FIG. 60(a) is thecontrol, and FIG. 60(b) is the tested composition. The inhibitionpercentage for Fusarium sp. was measured to be 63.78%.

Example 16A

The conditions of Example 12 were reproduced, with the exception thatthe pathological fungus was Aspergillus sp. FIG. 61 shows the results ofthe test, and shows that the agriculturally acceptable formulationinhibited the growth of Aspergillus sp. FIG. 61 (a) is the control, andFIG. 61 (b) is the tested composition. The inhibition percentage forAspergillus sp. was measured to be 89.76%.

Example 16B

The conditions of Example 16A were reproduced, with the exception thatthe composition tested was a tannin composition extracted from Quebrachotree (genus Schinopsis) (composition “QAMAEA6Q03”). FIG. 62 shows theresults of the test, and shows that the agriculturally acceptableformulation inhibited the growth of Aspergillus sp. FIG. 62(a) is thecontrol, and FIG. 62(b) is the tested composition. The inhibitionpercentage for Aspergillus sp. was measured to be 78.92%.

Example 16C

The conditions of Example 16A were reproduced, with the exception thatthe composition tested was a tannin composition extracted from Acaciatree (genus Acacia) (composition “QAMMSAPA06”). FIG. 63 shows theresults of the test, and shows that the agriculturally acceptableformulation inhibited the growth of Aspergillus sp. FIG. 63(a) is thecontrol, and FIG. 63(b) is the tested composition. The inhibitionpercentage for Aspergillus sp. was measured to be 68.79%.

Example 17A

The conditions of Example 1A were reproduced, with the exception that atannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis)(composition “QAMAEA6Q03”) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 64,effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 4 g/L,6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Clavibactersp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and8 g/L concentrations, the Clavibacter sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

Example 17B

The conditions of Example 17A were reproduced, with the exception that acomposition comprising 20% of QAMAEA6Q3 was tested. As can be seen fromFIG. 65, effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed tobe 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations atwhich the Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. Inthe 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Clavibacter sp.was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 18A

The conditions of Example 1A were reproduced, with the exception that atannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia)(composition “QAMMSAPA06”) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 66,effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 0.5g/L, 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were theconcentrations at which the Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower ratethan the control. In the 0.5 g/L, 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/Lconcentrations, the Clavibacter sp. was not visibly present, and hencedid not grow in the agar.

Example 18B

The conditions of Example 18A were reproduced, with the exception that acomposition comprising 20% of QAMMSAPA06 was tested. As can be seen fromFIG. 67, effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed tobe 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrationsat which the Clavibacter sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control.In the 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, theClavibacter sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in theagar.

Example 19A

The conditions of Example 2A were reproduced, with the exception that atannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis)(composition “QAMAEA6Q03”) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 68,effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L,4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which theErwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 4g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Erwinia sp. was not visiblypresent, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 19B

The conditions of Example 19A were reproduced, with the exception that acomposition comprising 20% of QAMAEA6Q03 was tested. As can be seen fromFIG. 69, effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed tobe 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which theErwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 4 g/L, 6g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Erwinia sp. was not visibly present,and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 20A

The conditions of Example 2A were reproduced, with the exception that atannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia)(composition “QAMMSAPA06”) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 70,effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 1 g/L,2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at whichthe Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 1g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Erwinia sp. wasnot visibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 20B

The conditions of Example 20A were reproduced, with the exception that acomposition comprising 20% of QAMMSAPA06 was tested. As can be seen fromFIG. 71, effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed tobe 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrationsat which the Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. Inthe 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Erwiniasp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 21A

The conditions of Example 4A were reproduced, with the exception that atannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis)(composition “QAMAEA6Q03”) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 72, adose higher than 8 g/L is necessary to treat or prevent Ralstonia sp.

Example 21B

The conditions of Example 21A were reproduced, with the exception that acomposition comprising 20% of QAMAEA6Q03 was tested. As can be seen fromFIG. 73, a dose higher than 8 g/L is necessary to treat or preventRalstonia sp.

Example 22A

The conditions of Example 4A were reproduced, with the exception that atannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia)(composition “QAMMSAPA06”) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 74,effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 2 g/L,4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which theRalstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L,4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Ralstonia sp. was notvisibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 22B

The conditions of Example 22A were reproduced, with the exception that acomposition comprising 20% of QAMMSAPA06 was tested. As can be seen fromFIG. 75, effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed tobe 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations atwhich the Ralstonia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. Inthe 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Ralstonia sp. wasnot visibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 22A

The conditions of Example 5A were reproduced, with the exception that atannin composition extracted from Quebracho tree (genus Schinopsis)(composition “QAMAEA6Q03”) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 76,effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 4 g/L,6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which the Xanthomonassp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 2 g/L, 6 g/L, and8 g/L concentrations, the Xanthomonas sp. was not visibly present, andhence did not grow in the agar.

Example 22B

The conditions of Example 22A were reproduced, with the exception that acomposition comprising 20% of QAMAEA6Q03 was tested. As can be seen fromFIG. 77, effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed tobe 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at which theXanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 4g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Xanthomonas sp. was notvisibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 23A

The conditions of Example 5A were reproduced, with the exception that atannin composition extracted from Acacia tree (genus Acacia)(composition “QAMMSAPA06”) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 78,effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 1 g/L,2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrations at whichthe Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 1g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, the Xanthomonas sp.was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 23B

The conditions of Example 23A were reproduced, with the exception that acomposition comprising 20% of QAMMSAPA06 was tested. As can be seen fromFIG. 79, effective doses of the composition in this test were deemed tobe 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L, which were the concentrationsat which the Xanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control.In the 1 g/L, 2 g/L, 4 g/L, 6 g/L, and 8 g/L concentrations, theXanthomonas sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in theagar.

Example 24A

The conditions of Example 5A were reproduced, with the exception that asynthetic tannin composition (“TALSRA”; containing 3% tannins) wastested. As can be seen from FIGS. 80 and 81, effective doses of thecomposition in this test were deemed to be 41 ml/L, 51 ml/L, and 61ml/L, which were the concentrations at which the Xanthomonas sp. grew ata much lower rate than the control. In the 41 ml/L, 51 ml/L, and 61 ml/Lconcentrations, the Xanthomonas sp. was not visibly present, and hencedid not grow in the agar.

Example 24B

The conditions of Example 24A were reproduced, with the exception that adifferent synthetic tannin composition (“TALSFWW”; containing 3%tannins) was tested. As can be seen from FIGS. 82 and 83, effectivedoses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 46 ml/L, 56ml/L, and 66 ml/L, which were the concentrations at which theXanthomonas sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 46ml/L, 56 ml/L, and 66 ml/L concentrations, the Xanthomonas sp. was notvisibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 25A

The conditions of Example 2A were reproduced, with the exception that asynthetic tannin composition (“TALSRA”; containing 3% tannins) wastested. As can be seen from FIGS. 84 and 85, effective doses of thecomposition in this test were deemed to be 11 ml/L, 21 ml/L, 31 ml/L, 41ml/L, 51 ml/L, and 61 ml/L, which were the concentrations at which theErwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate than the control. In the 11 ml/L,21 ml/L, 31 ml/L, 41 ml/L, 51 ml/L, and 61 ml/L concentrations, theErwinia sp. was not visibly present, and hence did not grow in the agar.

Example 25B

The conditions of Example 25A were reproduced, with the exception that adifferent synthetic tannin composition (“TALSFWW”; containing 3%tannins) was tested. As can be seen from FIGS. 86 and 87, effectivedoses of the composition in this test were deemed to be 16 ml/L, 26ml/L, 36 ml/L, 46 ml/L, 56 ml/L, and 66 ml/L, which were theconcentrations at which the Erwinia sp. grew at a much lower rate thanthe control. In the 16 ml/L, 26 ml/L, 36 ml/L, 46 ml/L, 56 ml/L, and 66ml/L concentrations, the Erwinia sp. was not visibly present, and hencedid not grow in the agar.

Example 26A

The conditions of Example 4A were reproduced, with the exception that asynthetic tannin composition (“TALSRA”; containing 3% tannins) wastested. As can be seen from FIGS. 88 and 89, none of the doses testedwere deemed to be effective doses of the composition, as the Ralstoniasp. grew at a rate comparable to the control.

Example 26B

The conditions of Example 26A were reproduced, with the exception that adifferent synthetic tannin composition (“TALSFWW”; containing 3%tannins) was tested. As can be seen from FIGS. 90 and 91, none of thedoses tested were deemed to be effective doses of the composition, asthe Ralstonia sp. grew at a rate comparable to the control.

Example 27A

The conditions of Example 1A were reproduced, with the exception that asynthetic tannin composition (“TALSRA”; containing 3% tannins) wastested. As can be seen from FIG. 92, none of the doses tested weredeemed to be effective doses of the composition, as the Clavibacter sp.grew at a rate comparable to the control.

Example 27B

The conditions of Example 27A were reproduced, with the exception that adifferent synthetic tannin composition (“TALSFWW”; containing 3%tannins) was tested. As can be seen from FIG. 93, none of the dosestested were deemed to be effective doses of the composition, as theClavibacter sp. grew at a rate comparable to the control.

While the inventive concept has been described in connection with whatis presently considered to be practical exemplary embodiments, it is tobe understood that the inventive concept herein is not limited to thedisclosed embodiments, and covers various modifications and equivalentarrangements included within the spirit and scope of the appendedclaims.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method of preventing or treating a disease inplants, comprising administering a composition to a plant in needthereof, wherein the disease is caused by a fungus, and wherein thecomposition comprises at least one tannin selected from the groupconsisting of castaline and castanopsinines, and at least one itemselected from the group consisting of dispersants, surfactants and/orhumectants, inert components, thickeners, bactericides, resistanceinductors, biopesticides, fungicides, foliage fertilizers, and hormones.2. The method of claim 1, wherein the tannins comprise a tanninextracted from at least one Chestnut tree and wherein said compositioncontains from 5% to 30% by mass of the tannins on a dry weight basis. 3.The method of claim 1, wherein the fungus is one selected from the groupconsisting of Alternaria sp., Phytophthora sp., Colletotrichum sp.,Fusarium sp., and Aspergillus sp.
 4. The method of claim 1, comprising astep of mixing the composition with water prior to the administering. 5.The method of claim 1, wherein the composition further comprises acarbohydrate and bentonite.
 6. The method of claim 1, wherein thecomposition further comprises diatomaceous earth.
 7. The method of claim6, wherein the composition further comprises sodium lignosulfate,naphthalene sulfonate, and xanthan gum.
 8. The method of claim 1,wherein the composition is administered to at least one of the plant'sfoliage, stem, canopy, trunk, roots, shoots, twigs, or flowers.
 9. Themethod of claim 8, wherein the composition is administered to theplant's foliage.
 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the composition isadministered to at least one of the plant's seeds or rhizomes.
 11. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the formulation is administered to the plantat least twice at an interval of from 1-21 days.
 12. The method of claim1, wherein the formulation is administered during the plant's seedlingstage, transplant stage, vegetative stage, pre-bloom stage, full-bloomstage, post-bloom stage, fruit set stage, or dormancy.
 13. The method ofclaim 1, wherein the plant is a vegetable plant, a cereal plant, a fruitplant, a nut plant, or sugar cane.
 14. The method of claim 13, whereinthe plant is a fruit tree.
 15. The method claim 1 which is a method ofpreventing a disease in a plant.
 16. The method claim 1 which is amethod of treating a disease in a plant.
 17. The method of claim 1,wherein the composition contains from 5% to 30% by mass of the tanninson a dry weight basis.
 18. The method of claim 1, wherein thecomposition contains from 5% to 20% by mass of the tannins on a dryweight basis.
 19. The method of claim 1, wherein the compositioncontains from 5% to 10% by mass of the tannins on a dry weight basis.20. The method of claim 1, wherein: the composition contains from 5% to20% by mass of the tannins on a dry weight basis; the fungus is oneselected from the group consisting of Alternaria sp., Phytophthora sp.,Colletotrichum sp., Fusarium sp., and Aspergillus sp.; and thecomposition further comprises a carbohydrate and bentonite.
 21. Themethod of claim 1, wherein: the composition contains from 5% to 20% bymass of the tannins on a dry weight basis; the fungus is one selectedfrom the group consisting of Alternaria sp., Phytophthora sp.,Colletotrichum sp., Fusarium sp., and Aspergillus sp.; and thecomposition further comprises diatomaceous earth, sodium lignosulfate,naphthalene sulfonate, and xanthan gum.